Integration of the integrated development plan and ...
143
Integration of the integrated development plan and performance management processes considered E.M. Ntlabezo 23131896 Mini-dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master in Business Administration at the Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University Supervisor: Prof I Nel November 2013
Transcript of Integration of the integrated development plan and ...
Integration of the integrated
development plan and performance
management processes considered
E.M. Ntlabezo
23131896
Mini-dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree Master in Business Administration at the Potchefstroom Campus of
the North-West University
Supervisor: Prof I Nel
November 2013
ii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the integration of the Integrated Development
Plan (IDP) and Performance Management System (PMS) processes in the Mangaung
Metropolitan Municipality. The aim of this study will not be to find solutions to the lack of
service delivery, but to evaluate the lDP and PMS process as well as the theory. The
need for this study was considered relevant and necessary as municipalities today have
become focus points for service delivery as per their constitutional obligations.
The IDPs are management and planning instruments and are only effective if they
enable municipalities to improve and accelerate the delivery of essential services and
development. Central to the constitutional mandate, amongst other things, the Municipal
Systems Act 32 of 2000 (SA, 2000) requires municipalities to establish a Performance
Management System that will play a pivotal role in promoting a culture of Performance
Management. It is through Performance Management that priorities, objectives and
targets are set, as contained in the Integrated Development Plan, are implemented and
measured. Along with the implementation of lDPs, the Municipal Structures Act (117 of
1998) also mandates the implementation of performance management systems within
the structures of the municipality.
It was found during the literature review that the processes of IDP and PMS are linked,
the resulting performance is more likely to meet the needs of an institution. There are
various legislative acts and policy documents that state and mandates the use of these
processes. Along with this are various guidelines that have been formulated to assist
municipalities to successfully implement the lDP and a performance management
system.
Key words: Performance management, Integrated Development Plan, municipality,
service delivery
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to the following people for their contributions
towards my research:
Our heavenly father for his guidance, providing me with all that I needed to
complete this dissertation.
My study leader, Professor Ines Nel, Potchefstroom Business School, North-
West University (NWU), for being such an excellent, professional and exceptional
supervisor. His advice and generous guidance since the time I started with the
research lead me to the right track of the study, and made this research possible.
Your continuous advice, guidance, support and encouragement made this
research a success.
Ms Wilma Breytenbach for her warm, extensive and professional statistical
assistance she offered.
Antoinette Bisschoff for the language, typographic and technical editing of the
dissertation.
My husband, Luzuko Ntlabezo for being a loving, supportive and understanding
husband. Your assistance, consideration and encouragement made this study
possible.
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my children, Ancoma and Amkele
Ntlabezo, for their understanding when I could not spend quality time with them. I
want to apologise for not giving you mother love, care and support when you
needed it most. Your love and care kept me going.
My late Grandmother and Mother, you will always be in our memories (May their
soul rest in Peace), for their support and believing in me.
My uncle, Modikoe Moetsela, for always believing in everything I do and always
encouraging me to reach for the stars.
My sister, Palesa Moetsela, aunts and uncles‟ love and encouragement.
All municipal officials who participated in this study. Your responses contributed
tremendously to the completion of this study.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iv
LIST OF FIGURES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vii
LIST OF TABLES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vii
CHAPTER 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH --------------------------------------------------------- 1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
1.3.1 Primary objective ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7
1.3.2 Secondary objectives ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
1.4 RESEARCH METHOD ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
1.4.1 Literature review ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
1.4.2 Empirical study --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8
1.5 LIMITATIONS/ ANTICIPATED PROBLEMS -------------------------------------------------- 8
1.6 DIVISION OF CHAPTERS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8
1.7 CHAPTER SUMMARY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9
CHAPTER 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
LINKAGE BETWEEN IDP AND PMS PROCESSES ------------------------------------------------- 10
2.1 INTRODUCTION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
2.2 IDP IN SOUTH AFRICA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
2.3 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ------------------------------------------------------------- 11
2.4 THE PURPOSE OF IDP ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15
2.5 MAIN REASON WHY MUNICIPALITY SHOULD HAVE AN IDP ---------------------- 15
2.6 ROLE-PLAYERS IN THE IDP PROCESS --------------------------------------------------- 18
2.7 PHASES IN THE IDP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS -------------------------------------- 22
2.7.1 Phase 1: Analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
2.7.2 Phase 2: Strategies (reference) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 23
2.7.3 Phase 3: Projects ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
2.7.4 Phase 4: Integration------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
2.7.5 Phase 5: Approval --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
v
2.8 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND BUDGETING--------------------------------------------- 26
2.8.1 Overall structure of the municipal budget ---------------------------------------------------- 26
2.8.2 Multi year budgeting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 27
2.8.5 Budget cycle ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
2.9 THE KEY ELEMENTS WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE IDP USEFUL --------- 31
2.10 THE BUDGETING PROCESS AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ---------------- 33
2.10.1 Municipal budget hearings and ward committees ------------------------------------------ 34
2.10.2 Participatory mechanism ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34
2.11 MUNICIPAL PRIORITIES AND IDP----------------------------------------------------------- 36
2.12 SERVICE DELIVERY AND BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN --------------------- 36
2.12.1 Content of the SDBIP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37
2.12.2 Making and adopting a SDBIP ----------------------------------------------------------------- 37
2.13 RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO HOW INTEGRATING PLANNING AND
BUDGETING CAN BE ENHANCED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IN SOUTH AFRICA 38
2.14 ALIGNMENT OF IDP AND PMS --------------------------------------------------------------- 39
2.14.1 Policy background --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
2.14.2 Legislative requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 41
2.15 DEFINITIONS OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT------------------------------------ 41
2.16 PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ---------------------------------------- 42
2.17 BASIC STEPS IN DESIGNING A PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44
2.18 IMPLEMENTING PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ------------------------ 48
2.19 THE ROLE OF WARD COMMITTEES IN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ----- 56
2.20 MONITORING, MEASURING AND REVIEWING PERFORMANCE ------------------ 56
2.21 PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS -------------------------------------------------------------- 57
2.22 SDBIP AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ------------------------------------------- 58
2.23 PRINCIPLES GOVERNING PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ----------------------- 60
2.24 OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS OF A PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 61
2.25 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURE AND PERFOMANCE MANAGEMENT -- 63
2.26 CONCLUSION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 64
CHAPTER 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 65
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE EMPIRICAL STUDY ------------------------------------- 65
3.1 INTRODUTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 65
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 65
3.2.1 Selecting design technique ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
vi
3.2.1.1 Qualitative approach ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 66
3.2.1.2 Quantitative approach ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
3.2.2 Participants ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 67
3.3 DATA COLLECTING ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 68
3.3.1 Development and construction of questionnaire ------------------------------------------- 68
3.3.2 Data collection -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 70
3.3.3 Data analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 70
3.4 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 72
3.5 SECTION B: INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ------------------------------------- 77
3.6 SECTION C: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ----------------------------- 91
3.7 RELIABILITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURING THE
CONSTRUCTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 103
3.8 CORRELATION BETWEEN VARIABLES -------------------------------------------------- 103
3.9 SUMMARY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 111
CHAPTER 4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 113
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ------------------------------------------------------- 113
4.1 INTRODUCTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 113
4.2 BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH ------------------------------------------------------ 113
4.3 CONCLUSION ABOUT THE RESEARCH ------------------------------------------------- 114
4.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH--------------------------------------------------------- 117
4.4 RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY ------------------------------------------ 118
4.5 CONCLUSION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 118
APPENDIX A: LETTER FROM LANGUAGE EDITOR ------------------------------------ 126
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE --------------------------------------------------------------- 127
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Overview of IDP Processes .................................................................... 21
Figure 2-2: Relationship between planning and budgeting ....................................... 33
Figure 2-3: Linkage between IDP and PMS process ................................................ 47
Figure 2-4: SDBIP "Contract" ................................................................................... 59
Figure 3-1: Position within municipality ..................................................................... 73
Figure 3-2: Department within municipality ............................................................... 74
Figure 3-3: Highest Educational Level ...................................................................... 75
Figure 3-4: Working Experience ............................................................................... 76
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Benefits of IDP --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
Table 2-2: Role-players in the IDP process----------------------------------------------------- 19
Table 2-3: Budget Cycle ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
Table 3-1: Position within municipality ----------------------------------------------------------- 72
Table 3-2: Department within municipality ------------------------------------------------------ 73
Table 3-3: Highest Educational Level ------------------------------------------------------------ 75
Table 3-4: Working Experience -------------------------------------------------------------------- 76
Table 3-5: Vision of the municipality -------------------------------------------------------------- 78
Table 3-6: IDP process plan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 79
Table 3-7: Role players in the development of IDP ------------------------------------------- 81
Table 3-8: Municipal projects and IDP ----------------------------------------------------------- 82
Table 3-9: Ward Committees ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 84
Table 3-10: Alignment of IDP ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 84
Table 3-11: Budget ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 86
viii
Table 3-12: Financial capacity --------------------------------------------------------------------- 87
Table 3-13: IDP Steering committee ------------------------------------------------------------- 89
Table 3-14: Factors contributing to the unsuccessful implementation of IDP --------- 90
Table 3-15: Performance Management System ----------------------------------------------- 91
Table 3-16: Communication ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 93
Table 3-17: Project Team --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 94
Table 3-18: Role players in the development of PMS --------------------------------------- 95
Table 3-19: Employees involvement in the development of PMS ------------------------ 96
Table 3-20: Key Performance Indicators -------------------------------------------------------- 97
Table 3-21: Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan --------------------------- 99
Table 3-22: Reasons for not achieving IDP goals ------------------------------------------ 100
Table 3-23: Internal Audit -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 101
Table 3-24: Audit Committee --------------------------------------------------------------------- 102
Table 3-25: Descriptive statistics and correlations between variables: IDP ---------- 104
Table 3-26: Descriptive statistics and correlations between variables: PMS -------- 108
ix
ABBREVIATIONS
COGTA Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs
DPLG Department of Provincial and Local Government
ETU Education and Training Unit
IDP Integrated Development Plan
IGR Intergovernmental Relations
KPI Key Performance Indicators
LED Local Economic Development
LGTAS Local Government Turnaround Strategy
MFMA Municipal Finance Management Act
MSA Municipal Systems Act
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NWU North-West University
PMS Performance Management System
SALGA South African Local Government Organisation
QPMSIC Quarterly Performance Management System Implementation
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH
The introductory chapter provide a background and motivation for the study. The
chapter aims at motivating the study, as well as providing the problem statement, the
research objectives and the research methods that were applied in the study. It will
also provide a breakdown of the chapters contained in this mini-dissertation.
Government believes that people from all walks of life, no matter where they live and
who they are, are entitled to good quality services. However, service delivery to the
public continues to be a challenge and as such requires the commitment and
dedication of all public servants. The performance management system is a tool that
can monitor, review and improve the implementation of the IDP. Given that the
performance management system and IDP are complementary systems it must be
aligned. In terms of section 25 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act,
2000 (Act 32 of 2000 as amended) an Integrated Development Planning (IDP)
includes a single, inclusive and strategic plan for municipalities to develop the
capacity to integrate and co-ordinate activities and align resources accordingly. The
IDP is thus a process that helps municipalities to identify strengths and weaknesses,
constraints and opportunities so that actions can be taken with the intent to deliver
effective and efficient services to stakeholders. This study focuses on one of the
municipality in the Free State province, namely, Metropolitan Municipality.
Chapter 6 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No.32 of
2000) accords municipalities the responsibility to develop a performance
management system, and set targets that are monitored and review performance
based on indicators linked to the IDP.
Section 19 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of
1998) requires municipalities to annually review the needs of the community, its
2
organisational and delivery mechanisms for meeting the needs of the community and
its overall performance in achieving the objective of local councils.
In terms of Section 35(1) of the Municipal Systems Act (MSA), IDP must reflect the
principal strategic decisions with regard to planning, management and development
in the municipality.
In this regard and according to section 56 (2) (a-d) of the Local Government
Municipal Structures Act, 1998 as amended by Act 58 of 1999 “the Executive Mayor
must-“
identify the needs of the municipality;
review and evaluate those needs in order of priority, recommend to municipal
council strategies; programmes and services to address priority needs
through an integrated development plan; and matters of revenue and
expenditure, taking into account any applicable national and provincial
development plans; and
recommend or determine the best way, including partnership, programmes,
and services to the maximum benefit of the community”.
In terms of the Constitution of South Africa a municipality is required to provide
municipal services to citizens. In addition municipal management and officials
appointed politically must plan, manage and lead the development of our country
through the IDP processes. They must also be held responsible for creating jobs,
eradicating poverty and local economic development through the IDP process.
The purpose of the IDP is to ensure that resources available to the municipality are
directed at delivery of projects and programmes to meet agreed development
priorities. An IDP is a vital tool that ensures that the projects identified and carried
out by the municipality are related to the needs of the community (Core Municipal
Processes and Service Delivery, 2005:17).
3
The introduction of IDP has not only affected municipal management, but it can also
be used to improve services delivery in communities without access to basic
infrastructure. The implementation of IDP as a subsequent phase of planning serves
to connect the total efforts of the municipality behind a strategy to link the operational
activities to successful implementation of strategy. This would require senior officials
to work together with councillors, stakeholders, officials and communities. It is
important that planning is aligned to operational performance of the departments
within the municipality with the IDP as an overarching municipal plan, linking the IDP
to Service Delivery Budget Implementation Plan (SDBIP) (budgetary processes) and
prioritising projects and programmes.
The IDP was introduced more than 10 years ago offering management and
community a better way to measure performance of municipalities. The programme
links strategy, finance, performance measurement and management all together to
deliver and improve services to the community. There are a number of performance
measurement tools available for management and politically appointed employees in
the municipalities to use and select from but one that stands out as the preferred
method – the IDP. Municipalities should be able to determine priorities,
operationalise projects and develop formal action plans in terms of their IDP as
derived from the actual developmental needs. Carefully developed IDPs can also
assist municipalities in this case Metropolitan Municipality to pay special attention to
controlling needless spending on nice-to-have items and non-essential activities.
A number of studies were conducted in the past dealing with performance
management systems as implementation tools for IDP. Butler (2009:18) explains that
performance management starts with the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and
that the cycle for the year ends with the oversight report of the council. The major
challenge which lead to poor integration is that municipalities run their IDP, budget
and performance processes in silos.
Inadequate performance management including lack of monitoring thereof as well as
no consequences to official due to poor performance is a cause for failure of many
municipalities not achieving their service delivery objectives. Processes and controls
4
are not in place to ensure that the performance objectives of the municipalities filter
through to the performance contracts of municipal officials in order to direct their
daily operations. Leadership of the municipality does not set the tone by
implementing sound performance management processes, evaluating and
monitoring performance and consistently demonstrating that there are consequences
for poor performance (Klein, 2012:31-32).
Klein (2012:32) indicates that performance management is a process and to ensure
the proper alignment (downward cascading) of performance requirements to meet
the required outcomes it is imperative that a top down approach is followed which is
not followed by the majority of municipalities in South Africa. The leadership teams
need to ensure that all the strategic objectives for a specific financial year are
included in the SDBIP for that year. Once this has been done the responsibility and
accountability of meeting the set objectives must be assigned to the relevant
officials. These officials, together with their respective teams will have the
responsibility of ensuring that the performance indicators are met. Only once the
organisational (municipal) performance indicators have been assigned to the
responsible officials, will those officials be in a position to downward cascade (align)
the required actions to be taken to individuals. The downward cascaded
performance indicators and actions will form part of the individual‟s performance
contract (performance matrix) that he / she will be measured on during his / her
performance evaluation. The municipal goals as included in the IDP must be
translated into KPAs and KPIs within the SDBIP (where organisational performance
is measured).
Contributing factors (weaknesses) in linking planning and budget processes (Carter:
2012:2-3):
Municipalities tend to see the IDP and budget process as separate.
There is lack of clarity around the status of the IDP and what it should include.
Many municipalities and communities do not view the IDP as a prioritisation
process and use the IDP to produce a “wish list”. Councillors have reportedly
changed IDP plans after adoption without any adjustment to municipal
budgets.
5
Recent municipal demarcations have caused massive organisational
restructuring in municipalities. The organisational continuity required to carry
out a process as the IDP is thus often lacking.
Municipal staffs lack necessary financial, project management and business
planning skills for the development of sustainable project proposals and
business plans that would result in quicker disbursement from National and
Provincial departments.
The assignment of powers and functions of core municipal services to districts
and locals has been unclear.
Municipalities are unable to model the implications of varying tariff and rates
levels on total revenue or realistically forecast the financial implications (both
capital and operational) of service expansion projects identified in IDPs; and.
Municipalities are typically not collecting all revenue due from communities.
The causes of this are economic, structural and in some instances political.
Predictions of future revenue are thus not credible, undermining any existing
linkage between IDPs and budgets.
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
The strategy to integrate IDP, budget and performance management processes has
been encouraged by the IDP policy yet many municipalities do not have the capacity
to effectively draw up an IDP. Municipalities often simply use IDPs as wish lists of
what they would like to achieve but cannot within their current budgets.
According to the report of Auditor-General (SA, 2013:6-11) the following legal and
regulatory matters are relating to Metropolitan Municipality:
Section 46 of Municipal Systems Act (no.32 of 2000) requires disclosure of
measures taken to improve performance in the annual performance report
where planned targets were not achieved:
There were no proper processes and information systems relating to
measures taken to improve performance as disclosed in the annual
performance report.
6
Due to inadequate internal policies and procedures regarding processes
pertaining to reporting of performance information a total of 58% of planned
targets were not achieved and disclosed as required by Municipal Systems
Act (no.32 of 2000).
Section 41(c) of the Municipal Systems Act (no. 32 of 2000) requires that IDP
should form the basis for the annual report, therefore requiring consistency of
objectives, indicators and targets between planning and reporting documents:
SDBIP and IDP were not consistent and fully aligned due to lack of proper
review and monitoring.
The National Treasury Framework for managing programme information
(FMPPI) requires that performance targets be measurable and processes and
systems which produce the indicator should be verifiable:
Performance and targets relating to service delivery excellence could not be
measured. It was due to fact that management did not capacitate the IDP
office and implement adequate internal control measures.
The Auditor General was unable to obtain information necessary to validate
actual reported performance of service delivery excellence and stimulating
integrated and sustainable economic development prospects objectives (SA,
2013).
Out of 169 targets planned for the year, 69 targets were not achieved which
represent 40.83% of total planned targets were not achieved.
Strategic planning and performance targets:
The local community were not afforded at least 21 days to comment on the
final draft of the IDP before the plan was submitted to council for adoption as
required by regulation 15(3) of the Municipal Planning and Performance
Management Regulations.
Performance management system in line with the priorities, objectives,
indicators and targets contained in its IDP were not established as required by
Section 38(a) of the Municipal Systems Act (no. 32 of 2000).
7
Given that municipalities are the centre point of service delivery and economic
development, this study can assist municipalities with management in the
administration and measurement of municipal activities. It can also assist
municipalities to integrate the IDP, budget and performance processes together
which lead to service delivery.
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Selected objectives of this study are:
1.3.1 Primary objective
To develop a framework that will ensure an effective and efficient integration of the
IDP and performance management system.
1.3.2 Secondary objectives
Investigate integrated development and financial planning (budgeting)
processes.
Consider the appropriateness of processes and systems linking the IDP with
the budget in the Metropolitan Municipality; and
Determine whether the performance management system meets the
requirements.
1.4 RESEARCH METHOD
1.4.1 Literature review
A literature study will be done to provide an understanding of the IDP and PMS
framework with the assistance of the internet search according to the identified
keywords. The Literature study focuses on the following:
Integrated Development Plan
Performance Management System
Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan
8
1.4.2 Empirical study
The empirical study consists of the research design, participants and statistical
analysis.
Research is a systematic process of collecting, analysing and interpreting
information (data) in order to increase our understanding of the phenomenon about
which the researcher is interested or concerned. People often use systematic
approach when they collect and interpret information to solve small problems of daily
living. Here, however, focus is on formal research, research in which we intentionally
set out to enhance our understanding of a phenomenon (Leedy and Ormrod,
2010:2).
1.5 LIMITATIONS/ ANTICIPATED PROBLEMS
This research proposal is confined to Metropolitan Municipality. The findings of the
research will only be relevant to Metropolitan Municipality hence the findings may not
be extended to other municipalities. While there may be common trends associated
with the performance management, it is important to appreciate the unique dynamics
of each municipality in the country.
1.6 DIVISION OF CHAPTERS
Chapter 1: Introduction and problem statement
In this chapter the aim is to set the context of why the specific topic has been
chosen. In this chapter the problem statement has been formulated. The research
goals and the research method are given.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter explore the theory of IDP and PMS in South Africa. It commences with
the evolution of IDP then PMS and their relative legislative framework. It also
focuses on the Budgeting, Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan
(SDBIP) and Community Participation in developing the IDP and PMS.
9
Chapter 3: Empirical study
This chapter presented the empirical findings on the integration of IDP and PMS
processes in the Metropolitan Municipality. The chapter highlighted the research
design, data gathering techniques and sampling used for the study. Finally, it
concluded by presenting the data which was gathered as well as an analysis of the
findings.
Chapter 4: Conclusions and Recommendations
In the last chapter a summary of the research is provided. Specific findings and
conclusions derived from the research are discussed in more detail.
Recommendations on the integration of IDP and PMS process in a Metropolitan
Municipality.
1.7 CHAPTER SUMMARY
In this chapter the aim is to set the context of why the specific topic has been
chosen. The problem statement has been formulated. The research goals and the
research method are given.
10
CHAPTER 2
LINKAGE BETWEEN IDP AND PMS PROCESSES
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Prior to 1994 a legal framework regarding the IDP was not yet in place. Some of the
transitional local authorities were preparing IDPs but it was prepared under difficult
circumstances. Prior to 1994 many municipalities had no capacities or skilled officials
to develop such planning process. There were no training programmes for
capacitating municipal officials. However, quite a few of the local authorities have
already made significant progress towards establishing a planning practice which
assisted to improve implementation of service delivery.
Integrated development planning is one of the key tools for local government to
implement its projects and programmes. Integrated development planning is now
seen as a function of municipal management and as part of an integrated system of
planning and service delivery.
As is known from business practice a well-developed and effective performance
management system (PMS) is critical to monitor the implementation of plans. The
IDP process and the performance management process should therefore be
integrated. Integrated development planning it can be argued refers to the planning
stage specifically to objectives that should be achieved within the context of a
specific performance management system. Performance management on the
contrary fulfils a control function in the sense that it ensures that plans are
implemented, monitored and evaluated within the IDP process. It is therefore vital to
explore and understand the PMS in the municipalities in the context of successful
service delivery via the integrated development plan process.
The purpose of this chapter is to explore the theory of IDP and PMS in South Africa.
It commences with the evolution of IDP then PMS and their relative legislative
framework. It also focuses on the Budgeting, Service Delivery and Budget
11
Implementation Plan (SDBIP) and Community Participation in developing the IDP
and PMS.
2.2 IDP IN SOUTH AFRICA
Gueli, Liebenberg and Van Huyssteen (2007:101) explain that in South Africa (SA)
the integrated planning approach was launched after 1994 as a platform for
previously marginalised municipalities to directly contribute in service delivery
planning; change old and build new institutions; and to identify and prioritise strategic
development interventions with both short and long-term impact. This process has
provided an opportunity for municipal, provincial, and national representatives, as
well as other major players, to debate and agree on long-term development
strategies (over a 25-year period) and on more immediate ones (over a 5-year
period) for a given municipality.
The main focus in South Africa was and still is, to increase the rate of service
delivery, challenge the dualistic nature of its economy, and generate sustainable
economic growth. To achieve these goals, the planning process has to specifically
address the following key issues:
Restructuring the Apartheid spatial form.
Transforming local government structures to ensure that it promotes human-
centred development.
Establishing democratic, legitimate and transparent planning processes; and
Fostering a culture of cooperative governance and developing multi-sector
development plans.
2.3 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The legislative framework pertaining to the IDP is explained in this section. The
legislative framework establishes a basis for the formulation and implementation of
the IDPs.
12
2.3.1 In terms of Section 152 of the Constitution (Act no. 108 of 1996):
(1) The objectives of local government are:
(a) to provide democratic and accountable government for local
communities;
(b) to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable
manner;
(c) to promote social and economic development;
(d) to promote a safe and healthy environment; and
(e) to encourage the involvement of communities and community
organisations in the matters of local government.
(2) A municipality must strive, within its financial and administrative capacity, to
achieve the objects set out in subsection (1).
2.3.2 In terms of Section 153 of the Constitution, a municipality must:
(a) structure and manage its administration, and budgeting and planning
processes to give priority to the basic needs of the community, and to
promote the social and economic development of the community; and
(b) participate in national and provincial development programmes.
2.3.3 Chapter 5 Municipal Systems Act (no. 32 of 2000)Section 25(1), adoption of
IDP‟s, each municipal council must, within a prescribed period after the start
of its elected term, adopt a single, inclusive and strategic plan for the
development of the municipality which:
(a) links, integrates and co-ordinates plans and takes into account
proposals for the development of the municipality;
(b) aligns the resources and capacity of the municipality with the
implementation of the plan;
(c) forms the policy framework and general basis on which annual budgets
must be based;
(d) complies with the provisions of this Chapter 5 of MSA; and
13
(e) is compatible with national and provincial development plans and
planning requirements binding on the municipality in terms of
legislation.
2.3.4 The Municipal Systems Act (no. 32 of 2000), Sections 30, management of
drafting process:-
The executive committee or executive mayor of a municipality or, if the
municipality does not have an executive committee or executive mayor, a
committee of councillors appointed by the municipal council, must, in
accordance with section 29: (a) manage the drafting of the municipality‟s
integrated development plan;
(b) assign responsibilities in this regard to the municipal manager; and
(c) submit the draft plan to the municipal council for adoption by the
council.
The Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (no 32 of 2000), Sections 55, municipal
managers, as head of administration the municipal manager of a municipality
is, subject to the policy directions of the municipal council, responsible and
accountable for:
(a) the formation and development of an economical, effective, efficient
and accountable administration –
(i) equipped to carry out the task of implementing the municipality‟s
integrated development plan in accordance with Chapter 5 of
MSA;
(ii) operating in accordance with the municipality‟s performance
management system in accordance with Chapter 6; and
(iii) responsive to the needs of local community to participate in the
affairs of the municipality.
(b) the management of municipality‟s administration in accordance with
MSA and other legislation applicable to the municipality
14
2.3.5 Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (no, 32 of 2000) Section 26, core components of
IDP‟s, an integrated development plan must reflect:
(a) the municipal council‟s vision for the long-term development of the
municipality with special emphasis on the municipality‟s most critical
development and internal transformation needs;
(b) an assessment of the existing level of development in the municipality,
which must include an identification of communities which do not have
access to basic municipal services;
(c) the council‟s development priorities and objectives for its elected term,
including its local economic development aims and its internal
transformation needs;
(d) the council‟s development strategies which must be aligned with any
national or provincial sectoral plans and planning requirements binding
on the municipality in terms of legislation;
(e) a spatial development framework which must include the provision of
basic guidelines for a land use management system for the
municipality;
(f) the council‟s operational strategies;
(g) applicable disaster management plans;
(h) a financial plan, which must include a budget projection for at least the
next three years; and
(i) the key performance indicators and performance targets determined in
terms of section 41.
2.3.6 Section 53(6) of the Municipal Financial Management Act (no. 56 of 2003)
provides that the mayor of a municipality must determine how the IDP is to be
taken into account or revised for the purposes of the budget. Thus, the annual
budget of a municipality should indicate how it gives effect to the IDP over the
next three budget years and how the IDP may need to be revised given the
budgetary resources and spending commitments within the municipality.
15
2.4 THE PURPOSE OF IDP
SALGA (2012:4) indicates that IDP is a process through which municipalities prepare
a strategic development plan which extends over five-year period. The IDP is a
product of the IDP process. The IDP is the principal strategic planning instrument
which guides and informs all planning, budgeting, management and decision-making
processes in a municipality. Through IDP, which necessitates the involvement of all
relevant stakeholders, a municipality can:
Identify its key development priorities;
Formulate a clear vision, mission and values;
Formulate appropriate strategies;
Develop the appropriate organisational structure and systems to realise the
vision and mission; and
Align resources with development priorities.
Integrated Planning and Development Modelling (2010:3) explains the purpose of
IDP is to develop a 5-year strategic plan for the development of the municipality
which:
Links, integrates and co-ordinates plans and takes into account proposals for
the development of the municipality;
Aligns the resources and capacity of the municipality with the implementation
of the plan;
Forms the policy framework and basis for the budget; and
Is compatible with national and provincial development plans and legislation.
2.5 MAIN REASON WHY MUNICIPALITY SHOULD HAVE AN IDP
The Education and Training Unit (ETU, 2013) highlighted the following six main
reasons:
Effective use of scarce resources
16
The IDP will help the local municipality to focus on the most important needs
of local communities taking into account the resources available at local level.
The local municipality must find the most cost-effective ways of providing
services and money will be spent on the causes of problems in local areas.
For example, a municipality may decide to allocate resources to building a
canal that will prevent homes from being damaged during the flood season.
This will reduce the financial burden placed on the municipality‟s emergency
services.
It helps to speed up delivery
The IDP identifies the least serviced and most impoverished areas and points
to where municipal funds should be spent. Implementation is made easier
because the relevant stakeholders have been part of the process. The IDP
provides deadlock-breaking mechanisms to ensure that projects and
programmes are efficiently implemented. The IDP helps to develop realistic
project proposals based on the availability of resources.
It helps to attract additional funds
Government departments and private investors are willing to invest where
municipalities have clear development plans.
Strengthens democracy
Through active participation of all the important stakeholders, decisions are
made in a democratic and transparent manner.
Helps to overcome the legacy of apartheid
Municipal resources are used to integrate rural and urban areas and to extend
services to the poor.
Promotes co-ordination between local, provincial and national
government
The different spheres of government are encouraged to work in a co-
ordinated manner to tackle the development needs in a local area. For
example, the Department of Health plans to build a clinic in an area. It has to
17
check that the municipality can provide services like water and sanitation for
the effective functioning of the clinic. It seems, then, that the theory is that a
municipality would act in an ad hoc, uninformed and uncoordinated manner in
the absence of an IDP. Thus, this situation may lead to:
Duplication and wastage of limited resources; and
Other spheres of government imposing their development programmes on
a municipality, which might not be a priority for the residents of a specific
municipal area.
Table 2-1: Benefits of IDP
STAKEHOLDER BENEFITS
Municipal Council
Provide clear and accountable leadership and
development direction;
Develop cooperative relationships with stakeholders
and communities;
Obtain access to development resources and external
support;
Monitor the performance of municipal officials.
Councillors
Provides councillors with a mechanism of
communicating with constituencies;
Enables councillors to represent constituencies
effectively by making informed decisions;
Enables councillors to measure own performance.
Municipal Officials
Guides business unit planning within the municipal
administration;
Provides municipal officials with a mechanism to
communicate with councillors;
Enables officials to contribute to the municipality's
vision;
Enables officials to be part of the decision making
process.
18
Community and other
stakeholders
Gives an opportunity to inform the municipal council
what development needs are;
Gives an opportunity to determine the municipality's
development direction;
Provides a mechanism through which to communicate
with councillors and the governing body;
Provides a mechanism to measure the performance of
the councillors and the municipality as a whole.
National and provincial
sector departments
The availability of the IDP provides guidance to the
departments as to where their services are required
and hence where to allocate their resources;
Allows departments to coordinate service delivery and
development programmes in a municipal area based
on local conditions and requirements.
Private sectors The IDP serves as a guide to the private sector in
making decisions with regard to areas and sectors to
invest in.
(Source: SA, 2013: 10-11)
2.6 ROLE PLAYERS IN THE IDP PROCESS
There are several role players in the process of the IDP. These role-players include
the Executive Committee or Mayor; municipal manager, IDP co-ordinator/ manager,
municipal council, municipal departments and officials, Provincial and national
departments of local government. Various spheres of government have different and
complementing roles to fulfil in the process, and these roles can be summarised as
follows:
19
Table 2-2: Role-players in the IDP process
Spheres of government Roles and responsibilities
Local municipality Prepare and adopts the IDP.
District municipality
Prepares an IDP framework and District-wide IDP.
Provide support to poorly capacitated local
municipalities (through Planning and Implementation
Management Support System (PIMSS)).
Facilitates the compilation of a framework to ensure
coordination and alignment between local
municipalities and the districts.
Metros Prepare an IDP
Adopt an IDP
Provincial Department of
Local Government
Coordinates training.
Provide financial support.
Provide general IDP guidance.
Monitor the process of IDP in the province.
Facilitates coordination and alignment between district
municipalities.
Facilitates dispute of resolution between
municipalities.
Facilitates alignment of IDPs with sector department
policies and programmes.
Assesses the IDP.
Provincial sector
department
Provide relevant information on sector department‟s
policies, programmes and budgets.
Contribute sector expertise and technical knowledge
to the formulation of municipal policies and strategies.
Are guided municipal IDP in the allocation of
resources at the local level.
20
Department of Provincial
and Local Government
(DPLG)
Issue legislation and policy in support of IDPs
Issue IDP guidelines
Provide financial assistance.
Provide national training framework
Establish and provide resources for PIMSS
National Sector
Departments
Provide relevant information on sector departments‟
policies, programmes and budgets.
Contribute sector expertise and technical knowledge
to the formulation of municipal policies and strategies
Are guided by municipal IDPs in the allocation of
resources at the local level.
(Source: University of Pretoria, 2006:13-14)
Figure 2-1 follows on next page
21
Figure 2-1: Overview of IDP Processes
(Department of Provincial and Local Government, 2000: 23)
Before starting the planning process, an IDP Process Plan must be drawn up. This
plan is meant to ensure the proper management of the planning process. This plan
should outline:
The structures that will manage the planning process.
How the public can participate and structures that will be created to ensure
this participation.
22
Time schedule for the planning process.
Who is responsible for what; and
How will the process be monitored
District municipalities must develop a framework in consultation with all local
municipalities within the district. This framework will ensure co-ordination,
consultation and alignment between the district council and local municipalities. The
framework will guide the development of the IDP Process Plan for each local
municipality.
2.7 PHASES IN THE IDP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS:
The lDP process is one of the key tools for local government to cope with its
developmental role. The lDP process is seen as a function of effective municipal
management. This process also plays a key role in the integration system of
planning and effective municipal service delivery. The lDP process aims at arriving at
decisions relating to issues on a consultative, systematic and strategic manner.
These issues may include decisions regarding the municipal budget, land
management, promotion of local economic development, and institutional
transformation. The lDP process is also involved with guiding the activities of other
agencies in related government spheres, corporate service providers, non-
government organisations and the private sector within the allocated municipal area
(lDP Guide Pack 2000: 5).
The lDP process comprises following core phases; these phases form the structure
of the lDP framework. These core lDP phases include:
2.7.1 Phase 1: Analysis
This phase is made up of a focused analysis of the types of problems that people in
the municipal area have to deal with. It focuses on the types of problems faced by
people in the area and the causes of these problems. The identified problems are
assessed and prioritised in terms of what is urgent and what needs to be done first.
23
Information on availability of resources is also collected during this phase (lDP Guide
Pack 2001: 15).
With the identification of priority issues the municipality factors in the perceptions of
the community on their problems and needs, but also assesses the facts and figures.
In this phase it is vital for the municipality to understand both the symptoms and
causes for the problems that have been identified. This understanding of the problem
will enable the municipality to make the correct and most informed decisions in
finding the appropriate solutions. The participation of the stakeholders and the
community at this stage is very critical. The people that are affected should
participate in the identification of the priority issues and also in the determination of
the full extent of these problems. It is critical that the municipality does not make
uninformed assumptions on what the problems are in the area (lDP Guide Pack
2001:15).
The municipality will not be able to address each and every problem that is identified
due to limited available resources. With this fact in mind, it becomes even more
important that the priority issues are correctly identified and assessed. The
prioritisation process enables the municipality to allocate the scarce resources to the
problems and issues that have been assessed as being more important or most
urgent. The municipality must be aware of the available, existing and accessible
scarce resources in its area to establish their limitations and create the most realistic
solutions for the different issues (lDP Guide Pack 2001:15). At the end of this phase,
the municipality will be able to provide the following output:
An assessment of the existing level of development;
Details on priority issues and problems;
Information on causes of priority issues or problems and
Information on available resources
2.7.2 Phase 2: Strategies
Once a municipality understands the problems affecting the residents of its area and
the causes of these problems, it should then formulate the solutions to address
24
them. This phase includes the formulation of the following features (lDP Guide Pack
2001:15-16):
Developing a vision is a statement of the ideal situation the municipality would
like to achieve in the long-term once it has addressed the problems outlined in
phase one. The example of a vision statement can be an economically vibrant
city with citizens living in a secure, healthy and comfortable environment.
Defining development objectives - are clear statements of what the
municipality would like to achieve in the medium term to deal with the
problems outlined in phase one. For example, provide access to clean water
for all residents living in the informal settlement.
Development strategies - once the municipality has worked out where it wants
to go and what it needs to do to get there, it needs to work out how to get
there. A development strategy is about finding the best way for the
municipality to meet a development objective. For example, co-operate with
the Department of Water Affairs to provide one water stand pipe for every 20
households: and
Project identification - once the municipality has identified the best methods to
achieving its development objectives it leads to the identification of specific
projects (lDP Guide Pack 2001: 16).
2.7.3 Phase 3: Projects
According to the IDP Guide pack (2001:16) this phase deals with the design and
specification of projects for implementation. The municipality must ensure that the
projects identified have a direct linkage to the priority issues and the objectives that
were identified in the previous phases. It must also be clear on the following:
Who is going to benefit from the project?
How much is it going to cost?
How is this project going to be funded?
How long would it take to complete; and
Who is going to manage the project?
25
Clear targets must be set and indicators worked out to measure performance as well
as the impact of individual projects.
2.7.4 Phase 4: Integration
The municipality must ensure that when the projects are identified they must be in
line with the objectives and strategies of the municipality. The project must also be in
line with the resource framework, and comply with the relevant legal requirements.
The integration phase creates an opportunity for the municipality to harmonise the
project in terms of content, timing and location, in order to arrive at the consolidated
and integrated programme (lDP Guide Pack: 2001:16.).
The output of this phase is an operational strategy which includes:
Five-year financial plan.
Five-year capital investment programme.
An integrated spatial development framework.
Integrated sectoral programmes such as local economic development,
poverty alleviation and gender equity.
Consolidated monitoring/performance management systems.
Disaster management plan.
Institutional plan.
Reference to sector plans.
2.7.5 Phase 5: Approval
The final phase of IDP is presented to the council for consideration and adoption.
Once the IDP has been completed, it has to be submitted to the municipal council for
its consideration and approval. The council will assess the IDP and establish if the
IDP identifies the issues/problems that affect the municipal area and establish the
extent to which the formulated strategies and projects will contribute to addressing
the issues/problems. The council must ensure that the IDP is in line with the set out
legal requirements before it is approved. The public must have an opportunity to
comment on the IDP draft before it is approved. When the IDP is amended according
26
to the feedback from the public, the council will consider the IDP for approval (IDP
Guide Pack: 2001, 17.)
2.8 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND BUDGETING
The IDPs must be integrated and linked with budgets of municipalities (Parnell et al.,
2002:94). A budget is a mechanism to give effect to a municipality‟s service
strategies (Fourie & Opperman, 2007:95). It is an explanation of the way in which the
municipality will employ its resources to achieve specific objectives (Du Toit et al.,
2002:149). A budget is a financial plan that sets out how a government institution will
achieve its objectives (Pauw et al., 2009:58). A budget is a detailed plan for the
acquisition and use of financial and other resources over a specified time period. It
represents a plan for the future expressed in formal quantitative terms (Seal et al.,
2009:434)
According to Fourie and Opperman (2007:95) it is imperative that the annual budget
of a municipality is output-driven and that the intended outcomes are in line with the
service delivery objectives outlined in the IDP. Thus, a sound municipal budget is
one which sensibly allocates realistically expected resources to the achievement of
defined objectives identified as priorities in the approved IDP.
The Municipality must ensure that its budget conforms to its IDP. This could be
construed to mean that it is imperative for municipalities to ensure that their annual
budgets are output-driven and the intended outcomes are in line with the service
delivery objectives outlined in the IDP (Van der Waldt et al., 2007:188).
2.8.1 Overall structure of the municipal budget
Vennekens and Govender (2005:68) explain that a municipal budget is a document
that shows a municipality‟s sources of revenue and expenditure plans. It is classified
into two basic parts, an operational budget and a capital budget.
Capital expenses: money spent on durable items with a lifespan of at least one
year, such as machinery, equipment and buildings.
27
This part of the budget shows how much money local government is planning to
invest in infrastructure or other capital assets. Municipalities have to know how much
will be spent on this item each year, and where the money for this spending will
come from. This part of the budget is called the capital budget because it is used for
new physical development, or infrastructure investment. The MFMA requires
municipalities to prepare balanced budgets. This means that they have to make
reasonable estimates of income and match it to anticipated expenditure (SALGA,
2006:84).
Operating expenses: money spent on items that are „consumed‟ during a year,
including salaries, consumables and administrative items.
SALGA (2006:83) indicate that this part of the budget shows how much money is
spent on running the administration and delivering the day-to-day services including
the maintenance of existing assets and infrastructure. It shows where this money
comes from (sources of revenue). This income may be from rates & taxes, service
charges and inter-governmental transfers. An operating budget is used to cover the
following expenditure items which are on-going expenses that a municipality needs
to deliver day-to-day services and to conduct its own administration:
Salaries and allowances: This refers to salaries and wages for municipal staff
and allowances such as travel.
General expenses: This includes items that are used for the general running
of a municipality: for example, telephone, post, rent and also the purchase of
bulk water and electricity for resale to the residents. Councillors‟ allowances
are also included here.
2.8.2 Multi year budgeting
Municipalities are required to work to 3 year capital and operating budget cycles.
This provides officials and councillors with a medium term plan for spending. It
enables councillors to monitor spending and to identify problems timeously and to
plan accordingly.
28
These budgets must be clearly linked to the IDP of the municipality which reflect their
current and future development priorities. This requirement ensures that the issues
are prioritised by the community and agreed to by council are budgeted for. The 3
years cycle for budget processes and financial management run continuously and
overlap. The three budgets that are operating simultaneously are as follows (SALGA,
2006:83-84):
2.8.2.1 Past financial year
This budget cycle requires council to be accountable for past performance.
For this budget process council needs to:
Prepare annual financial statements
Prepare oversight reports for community feedback
Prepare annual reports and
Submit for audit the annual financial statements.
2.8.2.2 Current financial year
This budget cycle requires council to manage its activities in the interests of good
governance. In this budget process council needs to focus on:
Monitoring;
Reporting; and
Evaluating performance.
2.8.2.3 Next financial year
This budget cycle covers planning and preparation of next year‟s budget. This is
done in conjunction with the IDP and projects proposed for each year. This planning
takes IDP review processes into account.
29
2.8.5 Budget cycle
The stages of preparing a budget are reflected in a plan called the budget cycle.
Community members and Ward Committees need to be aware of this cycle so that
they can participate meaningfully. Three budgets operate at the same time in a
municipal council: previous year‟s budget, currents year‟s budget and the
forthcoming medium-term budget. This is called multi-year budgeting (Department of
Provincial and Local Government, 2005: 49-50).
Table 2-3: Budget Cycle
BUDGETING PHASE WHAT CAN BE DONE BY WARD COMMITTEES
Planning
Develop community consultation forums.
Ensure municipal councillors know their communities,
visit them regularly and listen to community problems
and needs.
Think ahead and identify the services they would like for
their communities in a few years.
Be aware of developments in other municipalities – learn
from their ideas and experiences.
Take note of deadlines that will affect their wards.
Strategising Review the past performance of the municipality -
understanding the result of consultative processes.
Preparing Keep the community informed about the process.
Tabling
Make sure that community members understand the
budget summary and specifics relating to the ward.
Ensure that Ward Committee members are involved in
consultation forums.
Ensure appropriate consultation responses are reported
back to council.
Approval
Ensure that community concerns have been heard.
Feed documentation to the local community and make
sure it is readily available.
30
Finalising
Make sure that community members understand the
final budget, SDBIP and performance agreements.
Note where these are published and ensure that
community members understand them.
Multi-year budgets Ward committee involvement.
Previous year‟s budget
Ensure that the council is accountable for its past
performance.
Give feedback from the community to the council once
they have reviewed how the funds were spent.
Give feedback from the community to council on the
Auditor- General‟s reports on the financial management
of the municipality.
Current year‟s budget
Encourage those in their wards to pay their rates and
taxes.
Challenge any waste of municipal money that they hear
about and ask for an investigation.
Make their councillor accountable for fighting corruption
or wastage of municipal funds.
Keep up to date with reports on council revenue
collection and service delivery.
Mobilise their communities to ensure that problems are
identified and reported to their councillors and expect
that they will be remedied.
Forthcoming budget
As planning for this budget begins a year in advance
Ward Committees must give feedback after consultation
with the community.
(Department of Provincial and Local Government, 2005: 50)
The MFMA, 2003 requires that the municipal budget matches the IDP. Linking the
municipal budget to the IDP ensures that councillors are accountable to communities
and that the needs of those they represent are addressed and become a reality. The
priorities identified in the IDP should be tied to capital expenditure in the municipal
budget. The IDP should be reviewed by the council once a year. The council should
31
also review the budget at the same time. IDPs should fit in with the IDPs of other
municipalities in the area, and the growth plans of both the provincial and national
spheres of government. This can save time and money (Department of Provincial
and Local Government, 2005: 44).
The general principle in compiling a municipal budget is that the developmental
policy proposals contained in the IDP of the municipality must be costed and
budgeted for. Having looked at the municipality‟s IDP, you may want to verify
whether priority issues have also been budgeted for in alignment with the IDP
documentation. This information should, to some extent at least, be found in the
municipality‟s budget. Councillors are required to oversee the preparation of a
budget which should reflect the community‟s needs as captured in the IDP. This
process, like the IDP process, requires input from the public and is designed to
address basic and social needs in the community.
2.9 THE KEY ELEMENTS WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE THE IDP USEFUL
According to White Paper 1998: Section B the following key elements are
required to make IDP useful and practical instruments for municipalities to
work with are as follows (SA, 1998: Section B):
Developing a strategy and clear objectives:
The Development Facilitation Act requires municipalities to develop objectives
for service delivery (the services which a municipality will provide, the
standards of service and the level at which they will be provided); the 'form' of
the settlement (these objectives deal with issues normally associated with
'town and regional planning' or the spatial planning of an area, such as land-
use control, environmental planning, integrating low-income areas into the
broader settlement, and so on); and development strategies. These objectives
will provide a broad strategic framework for development.
Developing action plans and budgets:
32
Two key and inter-linked action plans are required to move from objectives to
delivery. The first is an institutional plan of action, the second a financial plan
of action.
- Institutional plans:
Institutional plans, including human resource development strategies, are
particularly important tools for municipalities during the transformation
period. Institutional action plans are intended to assist municipalities in
reorganising their administrations for improved delivery to communities.
Section F: Administrative Systems discusses institutional planning and
transformation in more detail.
- Financial plans:
Integrated development planning should be linked to financial planning. A
financial plan involves producing a medium-term (five-year) projection of
capital and recurrent expenditure. This means incorporating municipal land
development objectives and other strategies into the normal medium-term
planning for capital and recurrent expenditure. Municipalities should also
develop a plan for raising the revenue to support these strategies. The
financial plan should show how the priorities in the budget change over the
five-year period in order to achieve the goals set out in the integrated
development plan. On the capital side municipalities need to develop a
coherent infrastructure investment plan, which sets out how they will
achieve infrastructure targets, and mobilise public and private funding
sources for this purpose. The development of integrated development
plans and financial plans provides an opportunity for municipalities and
other spheres of government to discuss and prioritise public investment in
the area. Such governmental alignment could result in the production of a
negotiated 'public investment plan' for an area which brings together the
resource commitments of all spheres of government in relation to the
integrated development plan. Municipalities should seek private
investment to supplement the public funds available for capital
expenditure. They can obtain assistance and advice on how to leverage
33
private investment from the municipal infrastructure investment unit, which
has been established for that purpose. Provincial governments should
monitor the extent to which municipal budget priorities reflect the
integrated development plan, and use existing conditional grant
mechanisms as incentives in this regard. The medium-term financial plan
forms a basis on which annual budgets can be drawn up. The following
diagram shows the relationship between planning and budgeting.
Figure 2-2: Relationship between planning and budgeting
TERM PLANNING BUDGETING
Long term (up to 25
years)
Vision
Medium term (up to 5
years)
Integrated
Development Plan
(including LDOs)
Financial Plan
(including infrastructure
investment plan on capital
side)
Short term (1 year)
Key projects
(Annual Action Plan)
Annual Budget
(Source: SA, 1998: 3.1.3)
2.10 THE BUDGETING PROCESS AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Yusuf (2004:3) state that the financial year for South African municipalities runs from
1 July to 30 June of the following year. According to the MFMA, the mayor of a
municipality is responsible for coordinating the processes for preparing the budget
and for reviewing the municipality‟s integrated development plan and budget-related
policies. Immediately after the mayor has tabled the annual budget, the accounting
officer (municipal manager) of the municipality must make public the annual budget
together with any supporting documentation and invite representations in connection
with the budget from the local community. The municipal council must then consider
34
any views put forward by the local community and any other organs of state that may
have made submissions on the budget. The mayor is then given an opportunity to
respond to the submissions and, if necessary, revise the budget and table
amendments for consideration by council. Council must then approve the annual
budget for the municipality before the start of the financial year.
2.10.1 Municipal budget hearings and ward committees
Budget hearings are special briefing meetings which ward councillors should use to
discuss developments in the budget and explain variations from original plans.
Budget hearings ensure that the requirements of the MFMA, 2003 are met in terms
of community participation in the process of budgeting. Municipal budget hearings
allow Ward Committees to participate in the development of the municipal budget
(Core municipal processes and service delivery, 2005: 48).
The MFMA, 2003 requires that municipalities produce reports on the progress of
service delivery in their areas. These reports provide communities with the means to
monitor development. The major role of councillors in local government is to interpret
the needs of the communities. Ward Committees play a role by assisting councillors
in getting this information from the community. They can do so by holding community
meetings and special IDP consultation meetings. During the budget consultations,
councillors should advise the community what effect the key decisions will have on
them. Again, Ward Committees play a role in supporting councillors in informing
communities (Core municipal processes and service delivery, 2005:48).
Yusuf (2004:1) explains that the Municipal Structures Act (no. 117 of 1998)
entrenches community participation by stating that the executive committee must
report on the involvement of communities in municipal affairs and must ensure public
participation and consultation and report the effects thereof on decisions taken by
council.
2.10.2 Participatory mechanism
35
The ward committee system and the sub-council system are the two main structures
for community participation (Yusuf, 2004: 2-3).
Ward committee system: The Municipal Structures Act (MSA) (no 117 of
1998) sets out the basic guidelines for the establishment of ward committees
(Section 72 - 78). These are, however, only broad parameters and it is up to
each municipality to formalise the powers and functions of these committees
either by means of passing a resolution or a by-law. The aim of the ward
committee is to establish a forum which will allow communities to have a voice
and participate in the functioning of the municipality, as well as a forum for
council to disseminate information to the community. Ward committees,
however, remain for the most part advisory committees which make
recommendations on any matter affecting their ward.
Sub-council participatory system: Sub-councils are set up by passing a by-law
and are the mechanism through which the council may consult the public on
their needs and to inform them of developments. The primary aim of the sub-
council participatory system is to decentralise decision-making so that
communities in a large metropolitan area can participate in decision-making.
The sub-council consists of councillors representing each ward in that area as
well as other councillors appointed by the council to ensure that each political
party is represented according to the proportion of votes the party received on
the proportional representation lists in the sub-council area.
Other participatory mechanisms: Other mechanisms available to
municipalities for community participation include public meetings, public
hearings, consultative sessions, report-back meetings, advisory committees,
focus or interest groups, formal advertising in the press, market research and
opinion polls, e-Government, community radio and community press.
Members of the community may also raise issues with the council or
municipality through petitions or questions to council.
36
2.11 MUNICIPAL PRIORITIES AND IDP
Local government is supposed to be the eyes and ears of government; it is an
important point of contact with all government services. Start by determining the
priorities, or those of organisation or constituency. Then it is vital to check whether
these priorities are a local government function or responsibility. If any of municipal
priorities are not local government responsibilities, municipality have to look at the
budget of the province concerned (available from that province‟s treasury) or the
budgets of the national departments, which appear in the Estimates of National
Expenditure (available from the National Treasury).
Once the municipality have ascertained that priorities are within the scope of local
government, consult the municipality‟s IDP. Those priorities that are municipal
functions should ideally appear in the IDP. Sometimes a priority issue may be
included under a broader municipal priority area, so you ought to read the sections of
the IDP outlining priority issues and highlight points of relevance for easy retrieval. If
you cannot find a specific priority in the IDP, make a note of this and ask the
municipality‟s IDP manager whether it is, in fact, in the IDP and, if so, where you
should look. If the issue is not a municipal priority at all, you or your organisation
could develop a strategy to advocate for the inclusion of the issue in the
municipality‟s IDP (Local Government Budget Guide, 2005:96 – 97).
2.12 SERVICE DELIVERY AND BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The SDBIP is a comprehensive annual plan drawn up by a municipality, stipulating
the intended spending on service delivery which includes operational and capital
expenditure. The SDBIP is approved by the mayor, in terms of the Municipal Finance
Management Act (Act 56 of 2003), Section 53 (1) (c) (ii). However, municipalities
utilise the IDP and SDBIP reports as organisational performance instruments,
resulting in an obscured understanding of municipal performance management and
its value in managing and measuring actual organisational performance.
De Visser (2007:10) explains that over the past few years, municipalities have
become acquainted with the three key instruments for strategic management. First,
37
the IDP sets out the municipality‟s key priorities and objectives for the medium and
long term. Second, the IDP is implemented through the municipal budget, which
allocates resources to the priorities of the IDP for the financial year and two years
thereafter. Third, the municipality monitors its performance on the priorities and
objectives of the IDP through its performance management system. So where does
the service delivery and budget implementation plan (SDBIP) fit in? The introduction
of another instrument accompanied by procedures and legal requirements can easily
make local government practitioners sceptical or obsessed with legal compliance.
The SDBIP should not be seen as an instrument that operates outside of the
municipality‟s IDP, budget and performance management system. Rather, the
SDBIP is an integral part of these three instruments. This is so for two reasons. First,
the content of the SDBIP flows from the content of the IDP and the budget. Second,
the SDBIP is a key instrument for managing the performance of the municipality.
2.12.1 Content of the SDBIP
SDBIP is an annually adopted document that contains projections for each month of:
Revenue to be collected, broken down by source; and
Operational and capital expenditure to be incurred, broken down by vote.
Furthermore, it includes for each quarter:
Service delivery targets; and
Performance indicators.
Essentially, the SDBIP is thus the annual action plan for the IDP and budget. The
SDBIP is not a financial instrument that is confined to the Chief Financial Officer‟s of
the department. It must be an action plan that is drafted with inputs from all municipal
departments and championed by the mayor and the municipal manager (De Visser
2007:10-11).
2.12.2 Making and adopting a SDBIP
The municipal manager drafts an SDBIP and submits it to the mayor within 14 days
after the approval of the budget. The SDBIP is approved by the municipality‟s mayor.
38
The mayor must approve the SDBIP within 28 days after approval of the budget. If
there is any delay in the approval of the plan, the mayor must inform the council and
the MEC for finance. The SDBIP must be communicated to the public no later than
14 days after approval. The mayor can revise the SDBIP during the course of the
year. However, any changes to the service delivery targets and performance
indicators must be approved by the municipal council (De Visser, 2007:11).
2.13 RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO HOW INTEGRATING PLANNING AND
BUDGETING CAN BE ENHANCED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IN SOUTH
AFRICA.
2.13.1 The following sources of information are necessary to provide a means by
which planning and budgeting could be better integrated:
Detailed databases of municipal communities that allow the grouping of
community members according to service levels received, charges levied
and collection rates. This would allow for easy tariff and rates modelling
and an understanding of affordability levels.
Detailed cost information on service and service expansions to provide
credible financial plans.
Corporate level systems producing information in formats understandable
to all departments.
2.13.2 To improve the integration of planning and budgeting, a number of skills
should be developed:
Project design and specification skills leading better proposals and
business plans would allow IDP role-players a better understanding the
financial commitments, potential revenue sources and time spans involved
in the project.
Municipal officials and councillors need to understand the process of
specifying objectives, outputs and outcomes in specific terms to aid
current budget reform processes.
39
All role players need view IDPs as a political process involving prioritising
activities so that remain within the resource constraints faced by
municipalities and not merely as a formality.
Capacity in conflict resolution and negotiation would aid municipal officials,
politicians and communities to compromise where there are differences in
priorities.
2.13.3 The separation of the IDP and budget process could be identified as the
principle cause of the IDPs not impacting budgets. The following
recommendations can be made in this regard:
The IDP must be seen as the basis on which the budget is formed and
adjustments to the budget must be consistent with the IDP.
The budget and IDP timetable within the municipality must be aligned to
ensure that the processes occur simultaneously and are integrated.
To conflict, the measurable performance objectives required by both the
Municipal Finance Management Act and the Municipal Systems Act (no.
56 of 2003) should coincide in the IDP and the budget.
Municipalities need to restructure their organisations to encourage interdepartmental
communication and coordination. One way of doing this is to create an office that
ensures senior municipal management and the executive drive the IDP process.
2.14 ALIGNMENT OF IDP AND PMS
Ethekwini Municipality (2008:10-15) explains that Performance Management is a
process which measures the implementation of the organisations strategy. At local
government level this has become an imperative, with economic development,
transformation, governance, finance and service delivery being the critical elements
in terms of Local Government Strategy. Performance Management provides the
mechanism to measure whether targets to meet its strategic goals, set by the
organisation and its employees, are met. National Government has also found it
necessary to institutionalise and provide legislation on the Performance
Management Process for Local Government.
40
The relationship between IDP and Performance Management is therefore legislated
and regulated. The Performance Management System serves to measure the
performance of the municipality on meeting its Integrated Development Plan.
Performance management is aimed at ensuring that municipalities monitor their IDPs
and continuously improve their operations and in terms of Section 19 of the Local
Government Municipal Structures Act (MSA) (no. 117 of 1998), that they annually
review their overall performance in achieving their constitutional objectives.
2.14.1 Policy background
The Batho Pele White Paper notes that the development of a service-orientated
culture requires the active participation of the wider community. Municipalities need
constant feedback from service-users if they are to improve their operations. Local
partners can be mobilised to assist in building a service culture. For example, local
businesses or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) may assists with funding a
help line, providing information about specific services, identifying service gaps or
conducting a customer survey.
The White Paper on Local Government (SA, 1998:5) proposed the introduction of
performance management systems to local government, as a tool to ensure
Developmental Local Government. It concludes that "Integrated development
planning, budgeting and performance management are powerful tools which can
assist municipalities to develop an integrated perspective on development in their
area. It will enable them to focus on priorities within an increasingly complex and
diverse set of demands. It will enable them to direct resource allocations and
institutional systems to a new set of development objectives."
The White Paper (SA, 1998:5-6) adds that "involving communities in developing
some municipal key performance indicators increases the accountability of the
municipality”. Some communities may prioritise the amount of time it takes a
municipality to answer a query; others will prioritise the cleanliness of an area or the
provision of water to a certain number of households. Whatever the priorities, by
41
involving communities in setting key performance indicators and reporting back to
communities on performance, accountability is increased and public trust in the local
government system enhanced".
2.14.2 Legislative requirements
Section 195 (1) (e) of the Constitution stipulates that people‟s needs must be
responded to and the public must be encouraged to participate in policy making. It is
vital that government regulate the conduct of public officials and role of public
participation in enhancing performance in every sphere of government.
The Batho Pele White Paper, 1997 stipulates that the departments at both national
and provincial level must have performance management systems that include the
setting of service delivery indicators and the measurement of performance.
The Municipal Systems Act (no. 117 of 1998), enacted in November 2000, requires
all municipalities to:
Develop a performance management system;
Set targets monitor and review performance based on indicators linked to
their Integrated Development Plan (IDP);
Publish an annual report on performance for the councillors, staff, the
public and other spheres of government;
Incorporate and report on a set of general indicators prescribed nationally
by the minister responsible for local government;
Conduct an internal audit on performance before tabling the report;
Have their annual performance report audited by the Auditor-General; and
Involve the community in setting indicators and targets and reviewing
municipal performance.
2.15 DEFINITIONS OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
According to Armstrong (1994:23) quoted by Subban et al. (2007:55) performance
management is defined as “a method of establishing shared understanding about
42
what is to be achieved, and an approach to managing and developing people in a
way that increases the probability that defined outputs will be achieved in both the
short and longer term”.
According to Bailey in Service Delivery Review (2003) quoted by Subban et al.
(2007:55) performance management is viewed as “the systematic, data oriented
approach to managing people at work that relies on positive reinforcement as the
major way to maximise performance”.
Performance Management is a process which measures the implementation of the
organisations strategy. It is also a Management tool to plan, monitor, measure and
review performance of indicators to ensure efficiency, effectiveness and impact of
service delivery by the municipality. Performance Management as defined by
Department of Local Government (DPLG) is a strategic approach to management,
which equips leaders, managers, employees and stakeholders at different levels with
a set of tools and techniques to regularly plan, continuously monitor, periodically
measure and review performance of the organisation in terms of indicators and
targets for efficiency, effectiveness and impact. This system will therefore in turn
ensure that all the leaders, managers and individuals in the municipality are held
accountable for their actions which should bring about improved service delivery and
value for money (Ethekwini Municipality, 2008:15).
2.16 PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
According to Pillay and Subban (2007:57-58) performance management purports to
get better results from the whole organisation, from the individual employees and
from teams within it. The performance management framework was established by
Department of Provincial and Local Government Guide to enable national and
provincial governments to systematically detect:
Early warning signals of under-performance so as to enable proactive and
timely interventions in municipalities experiencing difficulties;
43
Capacity limitations and thereby develop targeted capacity building and
support programme for local government; and
Weaknesses in the local government system for continued refinement and
improvement.
Framework also provides for municipalities to develop their own performance
monitoring systems which will serve as strategic tools to enable municipalities to:
Monitor their own performance in the implementation of IDPs;
Improve efficiency, effectiveness, quality and accountability in service delivery
while maximising the development impact; and
Empower communities and the public to hold municipalities accountable as
true and real agents of service delivery and development.
The Department of Provincial and Local Government‟s Guide on Performance
Management further states that the overall strategic objectives of the performance
management system are to improve the performance of municipalities through:
Creating pressures for change at various levels;
Creating a culture of best practice and encouraging shared learning among
municipalities;
Promoting accountability;
Contributing towards the overall development of the Local Government
system in the country;
Helping to develop meaningful intervention mechanisms; and
Guiding the development of municipality building programmes.
44
2.17 BASIC STEPS IN DESIGNING A PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM
According to Van der Walt (2004:288) when developing a framework or system for
performance management, the following steps are important:
2.17.1 Select the process and build support
The first step is to select the process to benchmark and build support from both
upper and middle management in order to gain the appropriate resources and foster
the spirit of participation required in an effective benchmarking initiative. Selecting
the process means determining which processes or issues are critical to the goals of
the organisation and whether benchmarking is the appropriate method to determine
the efficiency of the process. Not targeting a specific process to examine or attain
management support will almost certainly mean that the benchmarking attempt will
fall short of its goals. In this initial step it is important to develop an action plan to
focus efforts and keep information organised.
2.17.2 Determine the current performance
Before benchmarking one institution against another to discover how they achieve
high levels of service excellence or performance, one must understand one's own
performance. An initial self-assessment should include questions to determine
whether the process has been flowcharted and redundancies or inefficiencies have
been targeted. Process mapping will facilitate a thorough understanding of any
process. It is necessary to document the inputs, activities, and outputs of the process
and identify key performance measures for the process. The determining of the state
of the current environment is of crucial importance. Too often companies embark
upon benchmarking efforts because they want to achieve the known results of
similar institutions. This is misguided, because benchmarking is institution and issue
or service specific. Without a clear understanding of the environment and the impact
of specific processes on overall institutional performance, benchmarking will fail to
yield meaningful results.
45
2.17.3 Determine where performance should be
The first part of step three, determining the way it should be, is choosing potential
benchmark partners. The benchmark partners might be public institutions that are
successfully executing the process. Determining the way it should be is when a
municipality begins to focus on examining the process from an external perspective,
conducting secondary research to supplement internal exploratory efforts and
discovering which criteria are important. This understanding will lead one to the most
appropriate benchmark partners.
2.17.4 Determine the performance gap
Consider where a municipality should be and subtract where it is at the present point
in time – the difference is the performance gap. The larger the gap, the higher the
priority would be to narrow it. In this step, a municipality must consider a host of
issues and try to analyse them logically. Examine, for example, a process from a
cost, quality, time and productivity perspective, with the understanding that strength
in one area does not necessarily indicate strength across the board. For
performance gaps to be useful, they must be logically identified, organised and
categorised. This means in part that the causal factor behind the gap should be
attributed to people, processes, technology or cultural influences. In addition, each
gap should be ranked, based on a priority indicator.
2.17.4 Design an action plan
There are several ways to ensure that benchmarking efforts produce positive results.
One way is to use a goal-oriented, attainable and detailed action plan to plot the
improvement course. An action-plan template should include a description of the
overall action plan, detailing each specific action step and each problem the actions
are targeted to solve. The action plan should also describe the chronological steps to
implementation, defining requirements and specifications, and allotting an
appropriate time frame for implementation. The action should identify those
46
accountable for implementation and describe rewards if their efforts are on time or
ahead of schedule. Most important, perhaps, is to ensure that all key parties,
including management, process owners and those affected by the proposed change
buy into the action plan.
2.17.6 Continuous improvement initiates
As there is no end to learning and no such thing as accumulating enough
knowledge, benchmarking is not an activity that a municipality should do only once.
Rather, it is part of an on-going, continuous improvement effort that is vital for
organisations seeking to achieve and maintain competitive advantage in the new
economy. The secret to long-term success is to keep business processes effective
and efficient through continuous monitoring and measuring. The new economy is an
opportunity to embrace change. Using benchmarking as a tool for continuous
improvement is one way to determine whether the institution is doing everything it
can to meet the challenges inherent in the global, intensely competitive,
environment. The discussion in this chapter forms the basis of developing a
framework for performance management in municipalities. It will guide municipalities
to implement performance management systems. Before this can be done, an
analysis of current statutory and regulatory guidelines on performance management
is necessary, because performance management legislation is the primary guide to
establish a performance management framework.
47
Figure 2-3: Linkage between IDP and PMS process
Department of Provincial Government and Local Government (200:115-116)
48
2.18 IMPLEMENTING PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Phase 1: Starting the performance management process
This phase involves clarifying and delegating roles and responsibilities, setting up
internal institutional arrangements as well as a framework for managing the change
process. The following steps should be followed:
Step 1: Delegation of responsibilities
The Municipal Systems Act places responsibility on a municipal council to adopt a
performance management system, while holding the executive committee or
executive mayor responsible for the development of the system. The executive
committee or executive mayor may assign duties or responsibilities to the municipal
manager in this regard, but remains accountable for the development of the
performance management system. The municipal manager may delegate the
responsibility to another senior manager. It is important, therefore, that the council,
within its policy framework on delegation, assigns responsibilities accordingly. It may
be done in writing (Department of Provincial and Local Government 2001:7).
Step 2: Setting up internal institutional arrangements
A municipality may establish a project team, led by a senior manager, to establish
internal institutional arrangements for developing a performance management
system for the municipality. It would be preferable that the senior manager and the
project team are the same people involved in or responsible for the Integrated
Development Planning process. The team must report to the municipal manager,
who will be accountable to the executive mayor or the executive committee as well
as the council. The project team would be responsible for:
Preparing the organisation culture for performance management issues;
Facilitating the development of the system; and
49
Supporting the organisation in implementing the performance management
system.
Step 3: Managing the change process
When introducing a performance management system, it is important that the
municipality is prepared for change. Reaching a common understanding of
performance management is crucial. The most serious stumbling block in the way of
making performance management work arises out of different understandings of why
the municipality is in need of it and what the outcome of it will be. Stakeholders in a
municipality will thus need to come to a common understanding of performance
management. This is an important preparatory component of the process of change,
requiring officials to be aware and to understand and accept why performance
management is needed and what the principles to govern its development and use
will be. It is important that the leadership inform the organisation that performance
management will ensure the accountability of the municipality to citizens and
communities, and the accountability of employees to the municipality. This will help
the municipality to deepen democracy by encouraging public participation through
communication of performance information and it can be used as mechanism to hold
council accountable in the periods between elections. These preparatory steps are
necessary in ensuring the smooth introduction of a performance management
system that could help reduce problems in implementation (Department of Provincial
and Local Government, 2001: 8).
Phase 2: Developing a performance management system
Developing a performance management system is a crucial phase in the process. It
involves the development of a framework within which performance management
processes will take place. It also involves answering the following questions:
When does performance management start?
What are the components of a performance management system?
Who will manage performance?
50
When will performance be monitored, measured and reviewed?
What aspects of performance will be managed?
How do personnel respond to good and poor performance?
What institutional arrangements have to be established to make performance
management work?
Processes for Developing the System
The project team needs to plan the management of the process for developing the
system within the framework of legislation. This should include the identification of
stakeholders and the establishment of structures to facilitate the development of the
system. The following steps can be identified in developing a performance
management system (Department of Provincial and Local Government, 2001: 9):
Step 1: Current Reality
The project team also has to do an assessment of the way in which planning,
implementation and monitoring happens within the municipality, as well as identify
gaps in terms of new integrated planning and performance management
requirements (Department of Provincial and Local Government 2001: 9).
Step 2: Identification of stakeholders
It is important for each municipality to complete the exercise on identifying the
stakeholders for its performance management system. While there is a common
stakeholder category for all municipalities, it is important that municipalities
disaggregate these categories until it is useful for their municipality. The following are
stakeholders‟ roles (Department of Provincial and Local Government, 2001:9 - 11):
Citizens and communities – must be consulted on needs. Develop long term vision
for the area, influence the identification of priorities and the choice of indicators and
setting the targets. They must monitor, audit the performance against commitments
and given the opportunity to review municipal performance.
51
Councillors – facilitate the development of long term vision and develop strategies
to achieve vision and identify priorities. Adopt indicators and target set. Monitor
performance from different areas, review municipal performance for major reviews
such as the annual review and review performance of the executive committee.
Executive Committee – play the leading role in giving strategic direction and
developing strategies and policies for the organisation. Manage the development of
an IDP, identify indicators and set targets. Communicate the plan to other
stakeholders. Monitor the performance from different areas. Commission audits of
performance where necessary. Conduct the major reviews of municipal
performance, determine where goals have or have not been met, what the causal
reasons are and to adopt response strategies.
Executive Management – assist the executive committee in providing strategic
direction and developing strategies and policies for the organisation. Manage the
development and implementation of an IDP and ensure that the plan is integrated.
Identify indicators, set targets and communicate the plan to other stakeholders.
Monitor the implementation of an IDP regularly and identify risks early. Ensure that
regular monitoring is happening in the organisation and intervene in performance
problems on daily operational basis. Conduct reviews on monthly basis.
Sectoral Managers – develop sectoral plans for integration with other sectors within
the strategy of the organisation. Implement the IDP and make it reality. Measure the
performance according to agreed indicators, analyse and report regularly e.g.
monthly. Conduct reviews of sectoral and team performance against plan before
executive reviews.
Employees – contribute ideas to the IDP, adopt IDP by aligning personal goals and
plan with the organisational plan. Implement the IDP and fulfil the personal plan.
Monitor own performance continuously and audit the performance of the
organisation and respective team. Participate in review of own performance and
organisation performance where necessary.
52
Organised labour – play contributory roles in giving strategic direction and
developing long term vision for the organisation and municipal area. Contribute to
the development of an IDP and ensure support of members for the IDP. Monitor and
audit the performance of the organisation, especially from labour perspective.
Participate in the public review of municipal performance.
Step 3: Creating structure for stakeholder participation
It is important that structures are established that will facilitate the meaningful
participation of stakeholders in the development of the system, consistent with the
legislation. The municipality, in terms of its own circumstances, should determine the
nature of the structure. Municipalities should also consider the IDP, as a
performance management system must be in line with the lDP.
Step 4: Developing a system
The Municipal Systems Act no. 32 of 2000 requires, as mentioned, municipalities to
develop a performance management system suitable for their own circumstances.
Therefore, working with the stakeholders, the project team needs to develop and
propose a performance management system. A performance management system
implies a framework that describes and represents how the municipality's cycle and
processes of performance planning, monitoring, measurement, review and reporting
will happen and be organised and managed, while determining the roles of different
role-players (Department of Provincial and Local Government, 2001: 9). The system
must be of such nature that it:
Complies with all the requirements sets out in the Act;
Demonstrates how it is to operate and be managed from the planning stage
up to the stages of performance review and reporting;
Defines the roles and responsibilities of each role-player, including the local
community, in the functioning of the system;
53
Clarifies the processes of implementing the system within the framework of
the IDP process;
Determines the frequency of reporting and the lines of accountability for
performance;
Links organisational performance to employee performance;
Provides for the procedure by which the system is linked with the
municipality's IDP processes; and
Shows how any general key performance indicators (KPIs) envisaged in
section 43 of the Act will be incorporated into the municipality's planning and
monitoring processes.
Step 5: Publication of the System
Municipalities need to develop their own or adopt a system that suits their
circumstances. The municipality may publish the system in the local media for public
comment. The publication needs to be for a short period.
Step 6: Adoption of the System
The Council should adopt the system when it is satisfied that the process was
handled in accordance with the legislation and the proposed system complies with
the requirements of the law, especially the regulations governing the nature of the
system.
Phase 3: Implementing a performance management system
The project team, which may be the same as the IDP team, should develop an
implementation strategy for implementing a performance management system. The
strategy should be linked to the lntegrated Development Planning implementation
framework and should entail planning, implementation, monitoring and review. The
steps to achieve this are as follows:
54
Planning for performance
Step 1: Planning
The IDP process and the performance management process should appear to be
seamlessly integrated. IDP fulfils the planning stage of performance management.
Performance management fulfils the implementation management, monitoring and
evaluating the IDP process (Department of Provincial and Local Government
2001:16).
Step 2: Priority setting
lntegrated Development Planning should deliver the following products: an
assessment of development in the municipal area, identifying development
challenges, marginalised and vulnerable citizens and communities; a set of internal
transformation strategies, priorities and objectives, which, if achieved, would enable
the delivery and realisation of a development vision; a financial plan and medium
term income and expenditure framework that are aligned with the priorities of the
municipality; and a spatial development framework, disaster management plans as
well as the operational strategies (Department of Provincial and Local Government
2001:17).
Step 3: Setting objectives
All components of the IDP, whether they are strategies or priority areas, need to be
translated into a set of clear and tangible objectives. This is a crucial step in ensuring
that there is clarity on the IDP and those suitable indicators are found. The
construction of a clear and concise statement of objectives is needed. The statement
requires a tangible, measurable and unambiguous commitment to be made. It is
often useful to have a clear time frame attached to this commitment in the objective
statement. In setting objectives, a municipality needs to:
55
Carefully consider the results desired (more focus on outputs, impact and
outcomes);
Review the precise wording and intention of the objective;
Avoid overly broad result statements;
Be clear on the scope and nature of change desired and
Ensure that objectives are outcome and impact focused.
Setting key performance indicators
The municipality should, after consulting with community organisations, set
appropriate key performance indicators (KPIs) for each and every objective
contained in the IDP. These KPIs will include the general KPIs set by the Provincial
and Local Government. The KPIs will serve as yardstick for measuring performance,
including outcomes and impact, with regard to the municipality‟s development
priorities and objectives set out in its IDP. KPIs will be set for each of the key
performance areas determined in terms of this policy. The following types of KPIs
must be set (Setsoto Local Municipality, 2011:16):
Inputs indicators – these are indicators that measure the cost, resources
and time used to produce an output.
Outcome indicators – these are indicators that will be used to measure the
quality and impact of an output on achieving a particular objective.
Output indicators – those indicators that measure the results of activities,
processes and strategies of the programme of the municipality.
Setting targets
Setsoto Local Municipality (2011:16 – 17) indicate that the municipality must set
measurable performance targets with regard to each KPIs that it determined. The
municipality must ensure that the performance targets that are set will:
Be practical and realistic;
56
Measure the efficiency, effectiveness, quality and impact of the performance
of the municipality, administrative component, structure, body or person for
whom a target has been set;
Be commensurate with available resources;
Be commensurate with municipality‟s capacity; and
Be consistent with the municipality‟s development priorities and objectives set
out in the IDP.
2.19 THE ROLE OF WARD COMMITTEES IN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Ward committees are, in most instances, the primary method of ensuring local
community participation in the working of the municipality. There is a legal
requirement for the municipality to include local communities, through the ward
committees, in setting KPIs and performance targets and to ensure community
involvement in monitoring and reviewing these. When determining the key
performance areas of a municipality there may be competing interests from the
various municipalities depending on the issues that they consider to be most
important. The performance management system should incorporate as many of
these interests as are viable and sustainable (SALGA, 2006:107).
2.20 MONITORING, MEASURING AND REVIEWING PERFORMANCE
Community involvement in the process of monitoring, measuring and reviewing
performance is important, as the municipality must, after consultation with the local
community, develop and implement mechanisms, systems and processes to
monitor, measure and review performance. The performance must be measured,
monitored and reviewed against the KPIs and the performance targets (SALGA,
2006:108).
Setsoto Municipality (2011:17-18) indicate that the municipality should monitor all the
key performance areas and performance dimensions in respect of which key
performance indicators and performance targets had been set. Continuous and
programmed monitoring will be done to enable the municipality to early detect and
predict indications of under-performance. Based on the reasons for likely under-
57
performance, the municipality must ensure that corrective measures are taken to
achieve the set targets. The municipal manager and other managers must ensure
that the key performance indicators and performance targets set are met. This
requires proper work planning and scheduling, appropriate resourcing of activities
and continuous supervision. The management must also identify likely
underperformance and take corrective action where necessary in time to ensure that
performance targets will be met. The internal auditing function must audit and assess
the accuracy of performance reports, the functionality of the performance
management system, whether the performance management system complies with
the relevant legislation and the extent to which the municipality's performance
measurements are reliable in measuring performance. In addition the internal auditor
must continuously audit the performance measurements of the municipality and
submit quarterly reports on these audits to the municipal manager and the
performance audit committee. The performance audit committee must review the
quarterly reports submitted to it, review the performance management system and
make recommendations in this regard to the council via the executive committee and
at least twice during a financial year submit an audit report to the municipal council
via the executive committee.
In reviewing the municipality's performance management system, the performance
audit committee must focus on economy, efficiency, effectiveness and impact in so
far as the key performance indicators and performance targets set by the
municipality are concerned. The performance audit committee may communicate
directly with the council, municipal manager or the internal and external auditors of
the municipality, access any municipal records containing information that is needed
to perform its duties or exercise its powers, request any relevant person to attend
any of its meetings, and, if necessary, to provide information requested by the
committee and investigate any matter it deems necessary for the performance of its
duties and the exercise of its powers.
2.21 PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS
58
Setsoto Municipality (2011:10) explains that the municipality measures and
evaluates its performance in five dimensions, as follows, by using appropriate key
performance indicators (KPIs) for measuring input, outcome and output:
Effectiveness - why a particular service/project/programme (activity) exists
and what it seeks to achieve, including access to the benefits of the activity;
Efficiency - the resources committed to a particular activity and how they are
turned into outputs;
Economy - the cost of acquiring the resources used to perform a particular
activity;
Impact - the net improvement or deterioration in the quality of life or
organisational performance brought about by a specific activity or the effect of
a specific activity, whether intended or unintended, desirable or undesirable;
and
Quality - the opinion of the users of services of how “good” a particular
service is and the objective standard at which an activity is performed.
2.22 SDBIP AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
The Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) Circular 13 (2005:1) stipulate that
the SDBIP is a key management, implementation and monitoring tool, which
provides operational content to the end-of-year service delivery targets set in the
budget and IDP. It determines the performance agreements for the municipal
manager and all top managers, whose performance can then be monitored through
section 71 monthly reports, and evaluated through the annual report process.
The SDBIP serves as a “contract” between the administration, council and
community expressing the goals and objectives set by the council as quantifiable
outcomes that can be implemented by the administration over the next twelve
months. This provides the basis for measuring performance in service delivery
against end of- year targets and implementing the budget.
59
Figure 2-4: SDBIP "Contract"
National Treasury (2005:1)
The SDBIP provides the vital link between the mayor, council (executive) and the
administration, and facilitates the process for holding management accountable for
its performance. The SDBIP is a management, implementation and monitoring tool
that will assist the mayor, councillors, municipal manager, senior managers and
community. A properly formulated SDBIP will ensure that appropriate information is
circulated internally and externally for purposes of monitoring the execution of the
budget, performance of senior management and achievement of the strategic
objectives set by council. It enables the municipal manager to monitor the
performance of senior managers, the mayor to monitor the performance of the
municipal manager, and for the community to monitor the performance of
the municipality. The SDBIP should therefore determine (and be consistent with) the
performance agreements between the mayor and the municipal manager and the
municipal manager and senior managers determined at the start of every financial
year and approved by the mayor. It must also be consistent with outsourced service
delivery agreements such as municipal entities, public-private partnerships and
service contracts (MFMA circular 13 2005:2).
60
2.23 PRINCIPLES GOVERNING PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Amathole District Municipality (2012:9-10) highlights the following principles that
inform and guide the development and implementation of the Performance
Management System:
2.23.1 Simplicity
The system must be a simple user-friendly system that enables the municipality to
operate it within the existing capacity of its financial, human resources and
information management system.
2.23.2 Politically driven
Legislation clearly defines the tasks and responsibilities for both the legislature (the
Municipal Council) and Executive Mayor in relation to the monitoring and
development of the performance management system thus resting ownership to
both. The Executive Mayor is responsible for ensuring, developing, implementing
and improvement of the system. Legislation allows for the delegation of this
responsibility or aspects of it to the Municipal Manager or other appropriate
structure(s) as the Executive Mayor may deem fit.
2.23.3 Incremental implementation
It is important that while a holistic performance management system is being
developed, the municipality should adopt a phased approach to implementation,
dependent on the existing capacity and resources within the municipality. It is also
important to note that municipal performance management is still a relatively new
approach to local government functioning and therefore requires adequate time to be
given to the organisation‟s process of change. The performance management
system will not be perfect from the start, and it should be constantly improved based
on its workability and practicality.
2.23.4 Transparency and accountability
61
Members of the organisation whose performance will be monitored and measured
must ensure that the process of managing performance is inclusive, open and
transparent. This can only be achieved by taking effective participation in the design
and implementation of the system within the municipality. Again, the process must
involve and empower stakeholders so that they are able to understand how the
municipality and its departments are run, how resources are spent, and who is in
charge of particular services. Similarly, all information on the performance of
departments should be available for other managers, employees, the public and
specific interest groups.
2.24 OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS OF A PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM
2.24.1 Facilitate increased accountability and oversight
The performance management system should provide a mechanism for ensuring
increased accountability between
The communities and the municipal council;
The political and administrative components of the municipality; and
Each department and the office of the municipal manager (Amathole District
Municipality 2012:7).
2.24.2 Facilitate learning and development
While ensuring that accountability is maximised, the performance management
system must also provide a mechanism for learning and development. It should
allow for the municipality to know which approaches (processes, systems and
policies) have the desired impact, and enable the municipality to improve service
delivery. It should form the basis for monitoring, evaluation and improving IDP
implementation at Amathole District Municipality (2012:7).
62
2.24.3 Provide early warning signals
The performance management system should provide Heads of Departments
(HoDs), the Municipal Manager, Clusters, Standing Committees, Mayoral Committee
and the Executive Mayor with a diagnostic signal of the potential risks that are likely
to affect the realisation of full IDP implementation. It is important that the system
ensures that decision-makers are timeously informed of risks, so that they can
facilitate interventions, where and when it is necessary and possible to do so
(Amathole District Municipality, 2012:7-8).
2.24.4 Facilitate decision-making
The performance management system should provide appropriate management of
information that will allow efficient, effective and informed decision-making,
particularly in so far as indicating where the allocation of resources should be
prioritised in order to meet institutional or strategic goals.
The following are also intended benefits of the developing and implementing a
performance management system but not limited to:
Ensuring a continuous cycle of planning, coaching and feedback ;
Compliance with applicable and relevant legislation;
Promoting community participation in local governance; and
Inculcating a culture of performance amongst employees.
Then performance management is not confined to measuring the organisation
performance with regards to meeting its strategic goals only, but it includes
measuring budget or financial performance in meeting the objectives Amathole
District Municipality (2012:8).
63
2.25 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURE AND PERFOMANCE
MANAGEMENT
According to Kandula (2006) the key to good performance is a strong culture. He
further maintains that due to difference in organisational culture, same strategies do
not yield same results for two organisations in the same industry and in the same
location. A positive and strong culture can make an average individual perform and
achieve brilliantly whereas a negative and weak culture may demotivate an
outstanding employee to underperform and end up with no achievement. Therefore
organisational culture has an active and direct role in performance management.
Murphy and Cleveland (1995) believe that research on culture will contribute to the
understanding of performance management. Magee (2002) contends that without
considering the impact of organisational culture, organisational practices such as
performance management could be counterproductive because the two are
interdependent and change in one will impact the other (Ehtesham et al., 2011:79-
80).
The four traits of organisational culture in Denison‟s framework are as follows:
Involvement: effective organisations empower their people, build their
organisations around teams, and develop human capability at all levels.
People at all levels feel that they have at least some input into decisions that
will affect their work and that their work is directly connected to the goals of
the organisation.
Consistency: organisations also tend to be effective if they have strong
cultures that are highly consistent, well-coordinated, and well integrated.
Consistency is a powerful source of stability and internal integration that
results from a common mindset and a high degree of conformity.
Adaptability: ironically, organisations that are well integrated are often the
most difficult ones to change. Adaptable organisations are driven by their
customers, take risks and learn from their mistakes, and have capability and
experience at creating change. They are continuously changing the system so
64
that they are improving the organisations‟ collective abilities to provide value
for their customers.
Mission: successful organisations have a clear sense of purpose and
direction that defines organisational goals and strategic objectives and
expresses a vision of how the organisation will look in the future. When an
organisation‟s underlying mission changes, changes also occur in other
aspects of the organisation‟s culture (Ehtesham et al., 2011:80).
2.26 CONCLUSION
IDP is a strategic framework that provides guidance to the municipalities for service
delivery. IDP can be used to integrate resources to ensure service delivery is
attained in the municipalities. The municipalities are required to mobilise the financial
resources and allocate budget to implement IDP effectively and efficiently. IDP of the
municipality is as results of consulting the community and relevant stakeholders who
must contribute to the drafting, review and adoption of the plan.
The IDP, Budget and Performance Management processes must be linked or
integrated. IDP completes the planning stage of Performance Management.
Performance Management in turn, completes the implementation management,
monitoring and evaluation of the Integrated Development Plan. The performance of
an organisation must be integrally linked to that of staff. If employees do not perform
the organisation will not achieve its intended objectives. It is therefore important that
municipalities manage both at the same time. The next chapter will focus on the
empirical study on PMS and IDP.
65
CHAPTER 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE EMPIRICAL STUDY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter reviewed the relevant literature related to the integration of IDP
and PMS processes. This chapter has nine sections and begins with an introduction,
followed by research design and data collection, analysis of the results or findings
and summary of the chapter.
The purpose of this chapter is to present the results of the empirical study, in relation
to the problem statement in section 1.2 and the objectives of the study in section 1.3
of chapter one. The discussion of the findings in this chapter will be concluded and
associated with the research questions. The different methodological factors and
reflections regarding data gathering is discussed.
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
According to the presentation of Van Wyk‟s research design is the overall plan for
connecting the conceptual research problems to the pertinent (and achievable)
empirical research. In other words, the research design articulates what data is
required, what methods are going to be used to collect and analyse this data, and
how all of this is going to answer the research question. Both data and methods, and
the way in which these will be configured in the research project, need to be the
most effective in producing the answers to the research question (taking into account
practical and other constraints of the study).
A research design is a strategic framework for action that serves as bridge between
research question and the execution or implementation of the research. Research
designs are plans that guide the arrangement of conditions for collection and
analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose
with economy in procedure (Blanche et al., 2006:34).
66
Research is a systematic process of collecting, analysing and interpreting
information (data) in order to increase understanding of phenomenon about which
researcher is interested or concerned (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010:2).
3.2.1 Selecting design technique
Two methods may be used in the research: those are qualitative methods and
quantitative methods.
3.2.1.1 Qualitative approach
The qualitative method will be used as the main method of the study since the focus
of the study is not directly to test for cause and effect. It is said that the “general
purpose of qualitative research methods is to examine human behaviour in the
social, cultural and political contexts in which they occur”. It can be done by using
variety of tools such as interviews, historical methods, case studies, and
ethnography. It is somewhat new to social and behavioural sciences and, its
increasing recognition due to degree of satisfaction with other available research
methods. It also allows interviewer to answer a whole new set of questions in a
whole new way (Salkind, 2009:12).
3.2.1.2 Quantitative approach
It is said that the “quantitative researchers collect data in the form of numbers and
use statistical types of data analysis”. Data are the raw materials of research. Data
consist of lists of numbers that represent scores on variables. Quantitative data is
obtained through measurement (Blanche et al., 2006:34).
The purpose of quantitative research is to inquire about clarifications and forecasts
that can generalize to other persons and places. Qualitative research is explanatory
(although sometimes is not) in nature and observations can be used to build theory
from the ground up. It identifies one or few variables that the researcher intent to
67
study and collect data particularly related to those variables (Leedy & Ormrod,
2010:95).
This research study was conducted through review of literature study to gain in-
depth knowledge of the study area. It follows by identifying research gaps followed
by the development of the research questions. Therefore, in this study the
quantitative approach is used through a questionnaire.
Quantitative research relies on numerical evidence to ensure objectivity and
accurate results to draw conclusions. Quantitative research data primarily involves
statistical analysis. To be sure of the results' reliability, quantitative research
methods use a large sample size of the population or organisation and the data are
analysed by means of a computer. In the quantitative study the data collection is
derived from primary data sources such as scales, tests, surveys, questionnaires,
computers and secondary data sources. The data is then transformed into numbers
that can be scientifically analysed. The mean of analysis is deductive by statistical
methods and the findings may be precise, narrow or reductionist.
3.2.2 Participants
Samples should be selected from populations in such a way that you maximise the
likelihood that sample represents the population as much as possible. The goal is to
have the sample resemble the population as much as possible. The most important
implication of ensuring similarity between the two is that, once the research is
finished, the results based on the sample can be generalised to the population
(Salkind, 2009:31).
In order to address the research convenience sample is used. The population used
for this study is employees (Senior Management, Middle Management and Other
Employees to top management and politically appointed) of Metropolitan Municipality
(sample). The questionnaire is used to gather information about the municipality. The
questionnaire is conducted between subject to the outcome of the research
68
proposal. The questionnaire was sent through e-mail and delivered to the
interviewees.
3.3 DATA COLLECTING
The definition of research methodology is “how” collecting and processing data
within the framework of the research process (Brynard & Hanekom, 2006:35).
There are numerous ways of collecting data and they depend on the purpose and
aims of the study. Brynard & Hanekom (2006:38) explain the opinion that the most
frequently used technique of data collection within the two basic research methods
(qualitative and quantitative) are the interview, observation and questionnaire.
3.3.1 Development and construction of questionnaire
Neuman (2000:517) explains that a questionnaire is a written document in a
research survey that has a set of questions and recorded answers. It is stated in
chapter one, that the instrument used in the study is questionnaire developed by the
researcher. Information regarding the questionnaire was entered by the respondents
personally. The initial step was the development of the questionnaire where the
questions and items were developed from the literature review on the integration of
IDP and PMS processes. Questions or items of the same type or rather that pursue
the same type of information, were clustered together. The reason for that was to
prompt information of a specific or actual type. Design of the investigative categories
applicable to the research and literature is combined in the following analytical
manner:
Section A: Demographic Information
- Position within the municipality
- Department
- Highest Educational Qualification
- Working experience in a local government
69
Section B: Integrated Development Plan
- Vision
- Process plan
- Role players in the development of IDP
- Community involvement
- Projects
- Ward committee
- Corrective action
- IDP promotion
- IDP alignment
- Budget
- Financial capacity
- Steering committee
- Capacity/ Manpower
- Contributing factors
Section C: Performance Management System
- Performance management system
- Communication
- Project team
- Development of PMS
- Employees
- Key performance indicators
- Service Delivery and Budget implementation plan
- PMS Quarterly Meetings
- Reasons not achieving IDP
- Early detection
- Internal audit
- Audit committee
70
Section D: Comments or recommendations
- What are the challenges that the municipality is experiencing in order to
successfully implement IDP?
Sections A in the questionnaire required that the respondents indicate the applicable
answer by marking the designated block with a cross. The respondents could mark
one block where applicable. Sections B and C used a five-point Likert scale to
measure responses that sorts from “strongly disagree” with a value of one, to
“strongly agree” with a value of five. The Likert scale gives a reliable measure of the
actual position on the continuum, instead of indicating only whether the respondent
was favourably inclined on an issue or not.
3.3.2 Data collection
The questionnaire was printed and distributed to 150 municipal employees in the
Metropolitan Municipality. The procedures used to distribute the questionnaires
encompassed distribution via e- mail, personal delivery and structured interviews
using the questionnaire. These structured interviews were conducted as some of the
respondents could not understand the questionnaire but enthusiastic to participate in
the research. A period of three weeks for responding to the questionnaires was
allowed before the researcher could personally collect the questionnaires or receive
them via email. A total of 115 usable questionnaires were returned from the sample,
which constitutes 77% of the response rate. The main reasons for non-returns during
the research period were the inadequate time accessible to respondents to complete
the questionnaires and the employees busy work schedules.
3.3.3 Data analysis
Once the data was edited, coded and entered into the computer, data analysis was
undertaken. Analysis is the application of reasoning to understand and interpret the
data that have been collected about the subject (Zikmund, 2000).
Welman and Kruger (2001:189) state that in terms of qualitative approach
interviewer may take notes of participant‟s responses with a view to writing a more
71
complete report afterwards. As an alternative, a tape recording may be made with a
view to transcribing it later. In both cases the interviewer should take notes of the
participant‟s presumed non-verbal communication. Neither taking notes, nor
recording on tape should, however, inhibit the participant‟s spontaneous behaviour.
The Quantitative approach involves a statistical analysis of the obtained data.
Depending on the level of measurement used for the variables of the research study,
specific statistical procedures are applied. These procedures include the mode,
median, mean, frequencies, correlation coefficient, chi-squares, chaid analysis,
correspondence analysis, discriminant analysis, standard deviation, z-scores, t-test
and F-test. Descriptive statistics involve the description and summary of data, while
inferential statistics involve the inferences that are drawn from the results. Ultimately
the results of statistical investigations can be represented graphically by means of
bar charts or pie charts (Welman et al., 2005:242). In order to summarize such
information, tabulation is used to show how variables relate to one another by
arranging the information in a table or other summary format (Zikmund, 2000).
In this research HPSTATS was used to analyse the data. The common analytical
tools used to analyse the collected data in this research are descriptive statistics and
inferential statistics. Descriptive and inferential statistics are quite different from one
another, but work hand in hand.
After the descriptive analysis stage, a researcher generally applies inferential
statistics. Inferential statistics are used to make inferences or judgements about a
population on the basis of a sample (Zikmund, 2000). Inferential statistics also help
to establish relationships among variables, in which the conclusions are drawn and
decide whether the collected data relates to the original hypothesis (Salkind, 2000).
The techniques used to analyse the data and to draw the conclusions in this
research will be discussed as follows:
72
3.4 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS
Purpose of Section A
The purpose of Section A of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix A) was to
determine the demographic information of respondents. These questions were used
as opening questions to attract the attention of the respondents towards the
remaining parts of the questionnaire.
Position within the municipality
The first part of Section A was to determine the position of employees within the
municipality. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete
answers and there were three questionnaires where respondents did not indicate
their position within the municipality.
Table 3-1: Position within municipality
Position within
municipality
Frequency Percentage
Senior Management 17 15%
Middle Management 32 29%
Other Employee 63 56%
Total 112 100%
73
Figure 3-1: Position within municipality
Analysis of the results
The largest group in this analysis is characterised by other employees (lower level)
which is 56% followed by middle management which is 29% and Senior
Management which represent 15%.
Department within municipality
The second part of Section A was to obtain information with regard to the
Department that the respondents are positioned.
Table 3-2: Department within municipality
Department Frequency Percentage
Strategic Projects and Service
Delivery Regulation
24 21%
Finance 27 23%
Engineering Services 15 13%
Corporate Services 25 22%
Social Services 24 21%
Total 115 100%
74
Figure 3-2: Department within municipality
Analysis of the results
The largest grouping in this analysis is characterised by the Finance Department
with 23%, Corporate Services (include Planning and Economic Development) with
22% followed by Strategic Projects and Service Delivery Regulation (include Council
and Office of City Manager) with 21% and Social Services (include Human
Settlement) with 21%. The last category represents 13% which is indicated by
Engineering Services.
Highest educational qualification of respondents
The purpose of part 3 in Section A of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix A) was to
determine the highest academic qualification of the respondents. The results can be
used in defining the impact of previous education on specific development needs of
the respondents.
75
Results obtained
The highest academic qualification of all respondents is presented in Table 3.5
below:
Table 3-3: Highest Educational Level
Highest Educational Level Frequency Percentage
Matric and Lower 40 35%
National Diploma 37 32%
Degree and Higher 38 33%
Total 115 100%
Figure 3-3: Highest Educational Level
Table 3 specifies that the most municipal officials have Matric and lower than Matric
(35%), followed by a Degree and Higher representing 33%. A total of thirty seven
(32%) respondents indicated that they have National Diploma as their highest
academic qualification.
76
Working experience in a local government
The purpose of the last part of Section A of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix A)
was to establish the kind of working experience of respondents in a local
government. The results can be utilised to determine if past experience has an
influence on the understanding of IDP and PMS.
Results obtained
Working experience in a local government of all respondents is presented in Table
3.7 below.
Table 3-4: Working Experience
Working experience Frequency Percentage
0 to 5 years 19 16%
6 to 10 years 48 42%
11 years and above 48 42%
Total 115 100%
Figure 3-4: Working Experience
77
Analysis of the results
Table 3.4 indicates that the majority of the respondents with a total of 48 (42%) have
been working in local government for more than 6 to 10 years and 11 years and
above followed by 19 (16%) respondents who have been in local government for
less than 5 years.
3.5 SECTION B: INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
3.5.1 Vision
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 1-6 in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix A)
was to determine whether the municipality has a vision and is it aligned to the IDP.
Section 26 (a) of the Municipal Systems Act (no. 32 of 2000) describes the core
components of the integrated development plans. An integrated development plan
must reflect the municipal council's vision for the long-term development of the
municipality with special emphasis on the municipality's most critical development
and internal transformation needs.
• Results obtained
The average or mean and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 6 items representing a vision of the municipality are specified in Table
3.5 .The vision of the municipality are ranked from the highest to the lowest mean
score. Where Likert scale type questions (where 1 = “Strongly disagree” and 5 =
“Strongly agree”) are asked, relatively low numbers represent disagreement with the
statement, while relatively high numbers represent agreement with the statement. A
low number represents disagreement and suggests that the statement is perceived
to be false. Whereas, a higher number thus suggests that the respondents perceived
the statement as true.
78
Table 3-5: Vision of the municipality
Vision n mean s
Did your municipality develop a vision statement that
explains what the municipality seeks to achieve?
115 4.235 0.765
Does the municipality review its vision annually? 115 3.896 0.995
Is the vision of the municipality you are associated
with aligned with the IDP?
115 3.304 1.201
Is the IDP supportive of the vision of the
municipality?
115 3.244 1.225
Is the vision indicating what can the community
expect from the municipality?
115 3.130 1.181
Does your municipal vision enable the community to
measure the performance of the municipality?
115 2.965 1.235
• Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statement that the municipality developed a vision
statement that explains what the municipality seeks to achieve as the highest
because participants indicated a very high mean of x = 4.235 for this statement. This
suggests that respondents are very much in agreement with this question. Other
statement that also obtained high level of agreement was that the municipality review
its vision annually (x = 3.896). Three items indicated average mean higher than
three, (the vision of the municipality you are associated with aligned with the IDP) (x
= 3.304), (the IDP supportive of the vision of the municipality) (x = 3.244) and (the
vision indicating what can the community expect from the municipality) (x = 3.130).
This suggests that respondents neither agree nor disagree (uncertain) with these
statements. According to respondents the statement that the municipal vision enable
the community to measure the performance of the municipality obtained mean of (x =
2.965). This statement also suggests that respondents neither agree nor disagree
with these statements.
79
3.5.2 IDP Process Plan
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 7-9 (1-3) in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to
Appendix A) was to determine whether the municipality develop an IDP process plan
before starting the planning process. Before starting the planning process, an IDP
Process Plan must be drawn up. This plan is meant to ensure the proper
management of the planning process.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 5 items representing IDP process plan of the municipality are specified
in Table 3.6. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete
answers and there were three questionnaires where respondents did not indicate the
IDP process plan.
Table 3-6: IDP process plan
IDP process plan n mean s
Does the municipality you are employed with develop its
Integrated Development Plan (IDP) process plan on
time?
112 3.589 0.765
Do you think that the purpose of formulating an IDP
process plan is to ensure the involvement of the local
community?
112 3.705 0.995
Do you think the IDP process plan is aligned to the following legislative
requirements?
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 112 4.089 1.225
Municipal Systems Act 112 4.062 1.181
Municipal Finance Management Act 112 4.098 1.235
80
• Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statements “The municipality you are employed with
develop its Integrated Development Plan (IDP) process plan on time” with a mean of
x = 3.589 and the purpose of formulating an IDP process plan is to ensure the
involvement of the local community with a mean of x = 3.705. This suggests that
respondents are slightly in agreement with the statements. Other statement that
obtained high levels of agreement is the IDP process plan is aligned to the legislative
requirements such as Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Municipal
Systems Act and Municipal Finance Management Act with mean above four. Three
items indicated mean higher than four which indicate that respondents are in
agreement with these statements.
3.5.3 Role players in the development of IDP
Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 10 (1-5) and 17 in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to
Appendix A) was to establish who are the role players in the development an IDP.
Results obtained
Significant role players in the development of IDP are reflected in Table 3.7. The
results are ranked from the highest to the lowest mean score.
81
Table 3-7: Role players in the development of IDP
Role players in the development of IDP n mean s
Who are the significant role players in the development of IDP?
Municipal council 115 4.174 0.679
Municipal officials 115 4.200 0.716
Community members 115 3.643 1.149
Private sectors 115 3.452 1.201
National and provincial sector departments 115 3.696 1.077
Does your municipality involve the community in all the
stages in the formulation of IDP?
115 2.921 1.236
Analysis of results
The respondents rated the statement that municipal council and municipal officials
are significant role players in the development of IDP high. These factors obtained a
mean above four which indicate high level of agreement with the statement. The
involvement of community members, private sectors and national and provincial
sector department obtained means slightly above three which indicate that the
participants slightly agree with the statement. The statement that respondents
neither agree nor disagree (uncertain) with was the involvement of community
members. This is the case because the average mean for this statement was x =
2.921 which is slightly above two.
3.5.4 Municipal projects and IDP
The purpose of questions 12, 13 and 38 (1-12) in Section B of the questionnaire
(refer to Appendix A) was to determine whether the municipality use IDP as tool to
implement its project and to find out what are the priorities listed in the IDP.
82
Results obtained
Municipal projects and IDP results are reflected in Table 3.8. The results are ranked
from the highest to the lowest mean score. Some of the returned questionnaires
have missing or incomplete answers and there were two questionnaires where
respondents did not respond regarding the municipal projects and IDP.
Table 3-8: Municipal projects and IDP
Municipal projects and IDP n mean s
Do you think the IDP is a key tool for a municipality to
implement its projects / programmes?
113 4.381 0.672
Do you think the IDP ensures that the projects identified
reflect the needs of the community?
113 3.381 1.227
According to the IDP in your municipality, which of the below listed are prioritised
as needs of the community?
Water provision 113 4.053 0.962
Electricity 113 4.009 0.959
Solid waste removal 113 3.973 0.968
Sanitation 113 3.743 1.156
Health services 113 3.363 1.232
Social Development 113 3.035 1.217
Library services/ facilities 113 3.035 1.260
Safety and security 113 2.991 1.249
Emergency services 113 2.991 1.264
Customer care system 113 2.894 1.284
Tar and gravel roads 113 3.301 1.349
Public transport system 113 3.230 1.356
Analysis of results
The respondents rated the statement that the IDP is a key tool for a municipality to
implement its projects or programmes. This factor obtained a mean (x = 4.381)
above four which indicate high level of agreement with the statement. The
respondent rated the statement that IDP ensures that the projects identified reflect
83
the needs of the community and obtained mean of x = 3.381 which is slightly above
three (below 3.5) which indicate that the participants neither agree nor disagree
(uncertain) with the statement. The participants agree with the statement that water,
electricity, solid waste removal and sanitation have been prioritised as the needs of
the community. The means of all the factors are above four and above three (more
than 3.5) can be concluded that respondents agree with the statement. The
participants neither agree nor disagree with the statement that health services, social
development, library services or facilities, safety and security, emergency services,
customer care system, tar and gravel roads and public transport system have been
prioritised as the needs of the community. The results of the means obtained in
these factors are slightly above three (below 3.5) and below three (above 2.5) which
means that the participants neither agree nor disagree (uncertain) with the
statements.
3.5.5 Ward committees
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 14-15 in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality established the ward committees and
do they contribute to the development of IDP. It is the requirement for the
municipality to include local communities through the ward committees and to ensure
community involvement in development of IDP.
• Results obtained
The average mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 2 items representing ward committees of the municipality are specified in
Table 3.9.
84
Table 3-9: Ward Committees
Ward committees n mean s
Is the ward committees established in your
municipality?
115 3.478 1.149
Do you think ward committee members contribute
significantly towards the development of a rational
IDP?
115 3.217 1.176
• Analysis of the results
A means of x = 3.478 and x = 3.217 was calculated for the statement that ward
committees have been established in the municipality and ward committees
contribute to the development of IDP respectively. These results indicate that the
participants have moderate level of agreement with the statement which indicate that
they nor disagree or agree with the statements.
3.5.6 IDP alignment
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 19-21 in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether aligning of the office term of the Council and Municipal
Manager will improve service delivery.
• Results obtained
The average mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 3 items representing aligning IDP to the office term of the Council and
Municipal Manager are specified in Table 3.10.
Table 3-10: Alignment of IDP
Alignment of IDP n mean s
85
Do you think the IDP should be aligned to the office
term of the Council?
115 3.982 0.999
Do you think aligning the office term of Council and
IDP will improve service delivery?
115 4.095 0.917
Do you think the IDP should be aligned to the office
term of the Municipal Manager?
115 4.226 0.848
Analysis of the results
All three statements as reflected in Table 13 indicated high levels of agreement. The
participants agree that the IDP should be aligned to the office of the Council and
Municipal Manager and it will improve service delivery within the municipality.
3.5.7 Budget
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 22-30 in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality is linking their IDP with the financial
plan (budget).
• Results obtained
The average mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 3 items representing aligning IDP with the office term of the Council and
Municipal Manager are specified in Table 3.11.
86
Table 3-11: Budget
Budget n mean s
Does the municipality you are involved with link the
IDP with the financial plan (Budget)?
115 3.400 1.336
Do you think IDP goals are closely related to
municipal budgeting cycle?
115 3.304 1.285
Do you think effective IDP management and
budgeting translate into improved service delivery?
115 3.765 1.134
Do you think the council should oversee the
preparation of budget?
115 3.869 1.056
Does your municipality table its annual budget to
council in time?
115 3.956 0.930
Do you think the budget as policy process is driven
politically?
115 4.034 0.897
Do you think the annual budget reflect needs listed
in the IDP?
115 3.704 1.147
Do you think linking the municipal budget to the IDP
ensures that the needs of community are
addressed?
115 3.913 1.022
Does your municipal budget reflect issues as
prioritised by the community and agreed to by
council?
115 3.495 1.180
• Analysis of the results
A means below 3.5 was calculated for the three statements that the municipality link
the IDP with the financial plan (budget) , IDP goals are closely related to municipal
budgeting cycle and budget reflect issues as prioritised by the community and
agreed to by council. These results indicate that the participants neither agree nor
disagree with the statement. The respondents are in agreement (mean = 3.765) with
the statement that IDP management and budgeting translate into improved service
delivery. They are also in agreement that council should oversee the preparation of
87
budget municipality with mean of x = 3.869 and the budget is tabled to council in time
with mean = 3.956. A high mean of (mean = 4.034) was calculated for the statement
that budget as policy process is driven politically which indicate that respondents are
in agreement with the statement. The respondents rated the statements that the
(annual budget reflect needs listed in the IDP and linking the municipal budget to the
IDP ensures that the needs of community are addressed) slightly below four (above
3.5). This suggest that respondents are slightly in agreement with the statements
3.5.8 Financial capacity
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 31-32 (1-3) in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to
Appendix A) was to determine whether the municipality has adequate financial
capacity and is the municipality requesting financial assistance from other
stakeholders.
• Results obtained
The average mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 4 items representing financial capacity are specified in Table 3.12.
Table 3-12: Financial capacity
Financial capacity n mean s
Do you think your municipality has adequate
financial capacity to implement IDP projects?
115 3.287 1.302
Do you think aligning the office term of Council and IDP will improve service
delivery?
Private sectors 115 1.869 1.021
Local businesses 115 2.200 1.237
Donors 115 1.957 1.071
88
• Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statement that the municipality has adequate financial
capacity with mean of x = 3.287. This suggests that respondents neither agree nor
disagree with the statement. The statement as reflected in Table 3.12 indicated low
levels of agreement that the municipality is requesting assistance from private
sectors, local businesses and donor. These suggest that respondents are not in
agreement with the statement.
3.5.9 IDP Steering committee
• Purpose of question
The purpose of questions 33-35 (1-4) in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to
Appendix A) was to determine whether the municipality has IDP steering committee
and role players in IDP steering committee. Some of the returned questionnaires
have missing or incomplete answers and there was one questionnaire where
respondent did not respond to question regarding IDP steering committee.
• Results obtained
The average means (x) and the standard deviations (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 7 items representing IDP steering committee are specified in Table
3.13. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete answers and
there was one questionnaire where respondent did not indicate the IDP steering
committee.
89
Table 3-13: IDP Steering committee
IDP Steering committee n mean s
Do you think your municipality has a steering
committee for implementation of IDP?
114 3.553 1.073
Is the steering committee supporting the IDP
manager to ensure implementation of IDP
processes?
114 3.561 1.047
Are the below listed employees form part of the IDP steering committee members?
Municipal Manager 114 3.859 1.071
IDP Coordinator 114 3.894 1.091
PMS Coordinator 114 3.807 1.104
Heads of departments 114 3.701 1.128
Designated representatives from departments 114 3.614 1.179
Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the both statement that the municipality has a steering
committee for implementation of IDP and the IDP steering committee support the
IDP manager with mean of x = 3.553 and x = 3.561 respectively. These suggest that
respondents are slightly in agreement with the statements. Five items are slightly
below four (above 3.5) which indicate that respondents are slightly in agreement with
the statement that employees who form part of the IDP steering committee are
Municipal Manager, IDP coordinator, PMS coordinator, head of department and
designated representatives from departments.
3.5.10 Factors contributing to the unsuccessful implementation of IDP
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 37 (1-6) in Section B of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine what are the contributing factors to the unsuccessful
implementation of IDP.
90
Results obtained
The average mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean) of
each of the 6 items representing factors that contribute to the unsuccessful
implementation of IDP are specified in Table 3.14. Some of the returned
questionnaires have missing or incomplete answer and there was one questionnaire
were respondents did not indicate factors that contribute to the unsuccessful
implementation of IDP.
Table 3-14: Factors contributing to the unsuccessful implementation of IDP
Unsuccessful implementation of IDP n mean s
The below listed factors contribute to the unsuccessful implementation of IDP.
Skills constrains 114 4.061 1.139
Legislative factors 114 3.991 1.125
Political factors 114 4.421 0.727
Weaknesses in accountability systems 114 4.483 0.681
Weak intergovernmental support 114 4.325 0.887
Financial constraints 114 4.394 0.848
Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the all the statements high with the mean above four except
one slightly below four (above 3.5). These suggest that respondents are in
agreement with the statement that factors that contributes to the unsuccessful
implementation of IDP are skills constrains, legislative factors, political factors,
weakness in accountability, weak intergovernmental support and financial
constraints.
91
3.6 SECTION C: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
3.6.1 Performance Management System
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 1-6 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix A)
was to determine whether there is a working performance management system
(PMS) in the municipality and is PMS used to assess the implementation of IDP
goals. To determine that employees have clear understanding of the PMS and are
they sufficiently informed about how the PMS measure the performance in terms of
the IDP goals.
Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 6 items representing performance management system (PMS) are
specified in Table 3.15. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or
incomplete answers and there were two questionnaires where respondents did not
indicate the PMS.
Table 3-15: Performance Management System
Performance Management System n mean s
Is there a working performance management
system (PMS) in your municipality?
113 4.159 0.689
Is the PMS used to assess implementation of IDP
goals?
113 3.628 1.062
Do you have a clear understanding of the current
PMS?
113 3.434 1.224
As an employee, are you sufficiently informed about
how the PMS measures performance according to
IDP goals?
113 3.186 1.265
92
As an employee, are you satisfied with the
implementation of the existing PMS?
113 2.929 1.348
Do you think that PMS can be defined as a process
which measures the implementation of the IDP in
line with the organisation‟s strategy?
113 4.018 0.834
Analysis of the results
The respondents agreed with the two statements that there is working PMS in the
municipality and PMS can be defined as a process which measures the
implementation of IDP. These two items indicated means higher than four (x = 4.159
and x = 4.018) respectively which means that respondent agree with the statements.
A mean of x = 3.628 (above 3.5) was calculated for the statement that the PMS is
used to assess the implementation of IDP goals. This result indicates that the
participants slightly agree with the statement. Three items indicated average means
slightly above and below three. The means for the statements that the employees
have a clear understanding of the PMS was x = 3.434 (below 3.5), employees are
sufficiently informed about PMS was x = 3.186 (below 3.5) and employees are
satisfied with the implementation of PMS was x = 2.929 (above 2.5) which indicate
that participants neither agree nor disagree with the statements.
3.6.2 Communication
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 7 (1-4) in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether PMS is communicated effectively to all level in the
municipality. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete
answers and there was one questionnaire where respondents did not indicate the
communication of PMS.
93
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 4 items representing performance management system (PMS) are
specified in Table 3.16. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or
incomplete answers and there was one questionnaire where the respondent did not
indicate how the PMS is communicated to the different levels with the municipality.
Table 3-16: Communication
Communication n mean s
The PMS is communicated effectively to the organisation levels as listed below.
Executive Management 114 4.263 0.610
Middle Management 114 4.175 0.641
Councillor 114 4.140 0.663
Other Employees 114 3.798 0.988
Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statement that PMS is communicated effectively to the
Executive Management (x = 4.263), Middle Management (x = 4.175) and Councillors
(x = 4.140) with the means higher than four which indicates that they are in
agreement with the statement. A mean of x = 3.798 was calculated for the statement
that PMS is communicated effectively to other employee (lower level). This result
indicates that the participants slightly agree with the statement.
3.6.3 Project team
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 8 - 10 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality established a project team for the
development of PMS and is the project team the same people involved in the IDP
development process. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or
94
incomplete answers and there were two questionnaires where respondents did not
indicate the establishment project team for the development of PMS.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 3 items representing performance management system (PMS) are
specified in Table 3.17. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or
incomplete answers and there were two questionnaires were respondents did not
indicate the project team for the development of PMS and IDP within the
municipality.
Table 3-17: Project Team
Project team n mean s
Has your municipality established a project team, for
development of PMS?
113 3.735 0.955
Is the project team for the development of PMS the
same people involved in IDP development process?
113 3.593 1.032
Are the PMS and IDP development plan aligned? 113 2.788 1.285
• Analysis of the results
The respondents slightly agree (means above 3.5) with the two statements that the
municipality established a project team for the development of PMS with mean of x =
3.735 and the project team for the development of PMS is the same people involved
in the development of IDP process with mean x = 3.593. The respondents rated the
statement that the PMS and IDP development plan are aligned with mean x = 2.788
which indicate that respondents nor disagree or agree with the statement.
95
3.6.4 Role players in the development of PMS
• Purpose of question
The purpose of question 11 (1-7) in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine the role players in the development of PMS.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 7 items representing role players in the development of performance
management system (PMS) are specified in Table 3.18. Some of the returned
questionnaires have missing or incomplete answers and there were two
questionnaires were respondents did not indicate the role players in the development
of PMS.
Table 3-18: Role players in the development of PMS
Role players in the development of PMS n mean s
Are the below listed members involved in the development of PMS?
Community 113 2.637 1.282
Councillors 113 3.496 1.111
Executive Committee 113 3.982 0.719
Executive Management 113 4.115 0.609
Sectoral Managers 113 3.982 0.707
Employees 113 3.504 1.087
Organised Labour 113 3.558 1.093
• Analysis of the results
The respondents nor disagree or agree (means above 2.5) with the statements that
the community is involved in the development of PMS. The respondents rated the
statement that the councillors, executive committee, executive management,
96
sectoral managers, employees and organised labour are involved in the
development of PMS with mean above four and slightly below four (above 3.5) which
indicate that respondents agree with the statements.
3.6.5 Employees involvement in the PMS
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 12 -14 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine the employees involvement in the development of PMS.
Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 3 items representing employees‟ involvement in the development of
PMS are specified in Table 3.19. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing
or incomplete answers and there were two questionnaires where respondents did
not indicate the employees‟ involvement in the development of PMS.
Table 3-19: Employees involvement in the development of PMS
Employees involvement in the development of PMS n mean s
As an employee, is your performance agreement
linked to the IDP goals or objectives?
113 2.938 1.269
Are employees involved in setting goals in their
workplace/ departments?
113 2.841 1.306
Are employees aware that the performance goals
should be linked to the IDP goals?
113 2.867 1.319
• Analysis of the results
The respondents nor disagree or agree (means above 2.5) with the statements that
the employees are involved in the setting goals in their department with mean x =
2.841, performance agreement is linked to the IDP goals or objectives with mean x =
97
2.938 and employees are aware that the performance goals should be linked to the
IDP goals with mean x = 2.867.
3.5.6 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
• Purpose of question
The purpose of question 15 -17 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality developed a set of KPIs. The
involvement of the community in the development of KPIs and do KPIs serve as
yardstick for measuring performance.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 3 items representing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are specified
in Table 3.20. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete
answers and there were two questionnaires were respondents did not respond
regarding the KPIs.
Table 3-20: Key Performance Indicators
Key Performance Indicators n mean s
As an employee, is your performance agreement
linked to the IDP goals or objectives?
113 3.549 1.126
Are employees involved in setting goals in their
workplace/ departments?
113 2.699 1.238
Are employees aware that the performance goals
should be linked to the IDP goals?
113 3.354 1.209
Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statement that the performance agreement is linked to
the IDP with a mean of x = 3.549 which is slightly above 3.5. These suggest that
98
respondents are in agreement with the statement. The respondents nor disagree or
agree (mean below 3.5 and above 2.5) with two statements that the employees are
involved in the setting goals in their department with mean x = 2.699 and employees
are aware that the performance goals should be linked to the IDP goals with mean x
= 3.354.
3.6.7 Service Delivery and Budget Implementation plan (SDBIP)
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 15 -17 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality has SDBIP. According to Municipal
Finance Management Act (MFMA) Circular 13 (2005:1) stipulate that the SDBIP is a
key management, implementation and monitoring tool, which provides operational
content to the end-of-year service delivery targets set in the budget and IDP. It
determines the performance agreements for the municipal manager and all top
managers, whose performance can then be monitored through section 71 monthly
reports, and evaluated through the annual report process.
Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the seven items representing Service Delivery and Budget Implementation
Plan (SDBIP) are specified in Table 3.21. Some of the returned questionnaires have
missing or incomplete answer and one questionnaire where respondents did not
respond regarding the SDBIP.
99
Table 3-21: Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan
Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan n mean s
Does your municipality have Service Delivery and
Budget Implementation plans (SDBIP)?
114 4.096 0.716
Is your municipal SDBIP providing the basis to
measure performance in service delivery against
targets set in the IDP?
114 3.763 0.971
Is your municipal SDBIP providing the basis to
measure performance in implementing the budget
according to IDP?
114 3.692 1.074
Does the content of SDBIP flow from the contents of
the IDP?
114 3.684 0.989
Does the content of SDBIP flow from the contents of
the budget?
114 3.657 1.079
Does the SDBIP include service delivery targets
according to the IDP?
114 3.711 1.036
Does the SDBIP include performance indicators
according to the IDP?
114 3.763 1.033
• Analysis of the results
Seven item regarding the SDBIP indicated average mean higher than 3.5. This
indicate that respondents are in agreement with the statement that the municipality
has SDBIP with mean x = 4.096. They also in agreement with the statements that
SDBIP provide the basis to measure performance in service delivery against targets
set in the IDP with mean x = 3.763 and provide the basis to measure performance in
implementing the budget according to IDP with mean of x = 3.692. The factors that
the SDBIP flow from the contents of IDP with mean of x = 3.684 and flow from the
contents of budget with mean of x = 3.657. This suggests that respondents are in
agreement with the statement. The respondents are in agreement with the factors
that the SDBIP include service delivery targets with mean of x = 3.710 and include
performance indicators with mean of x = 3.763 according to the IDP.
100
3.6.8 Reasons for not achieving IDP goals
Purpose of question
The purpose of question 26 (1-4) in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine the reasons for not achieving IDP goals.
Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 4 items representing reasons for not achieving IDP goals are specified
in Table 3.22. Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete
answers and there were three questionnaires where respondents did not indicate the
reasons for not achieving IDP goals.
Table 3-22: Reasons for not achieving IDP goals
Reasons for not achieving IDP goals n mean s
In your opinion are the below listed reasons for not achieving IDP goals?
Lack of skills 112 4.134 1.017
No consequences attached to non-performance 112 4.366 0.710
Systems do not support performance 112 4.402 0.729
Lack of resources 112 4.366 0.816
No motivation to perform because the work
environment is not favourable for performance
112 4.330 0.809
Analysis of the results
Five items indicated average means higher than four which indicate that respondents
are in agreement with the statement that reasons for not achieving IDP goals are as
follows:
101
Lack of skills,
No consequences attached to non-performance,
System do not support performance,
Lack of resources and
No motivation to perform because the work environment is not favourable for
performance.
3.6.9 Internal Audit
• Purpose of question
The purpose of question 29 - 30 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality has internal audit unit to audit the
accuracy of the performance.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 2 items representing Internal Audit are specified in Table 3.23. Some
of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete answers and one
questionnaire respondent did not respond regarding the Internal Audit.
Table 3-23: Internal Audit
Internal Audit n mean s
Is the internal audit unit auditing the accuracy of the
performance reports?
114 2.947 1.481
Does your municipality have an in-house internal
audit unit?
114 4.105 0.876
Analysis of the results
The respondents rated the statement that the internal audit unit audit the accuracy of
the performance reports with a mean of x = 2.947 which is slightly above 2.5. These
102
suggest that respondents nor disagree or agree with the statement. A high mean of x
= 4.105 was calculated for the statement that the municipality has an in-house
internal audit unit.
3.6.10 Audit Committee
• Purpose of question
The purpose of question 31 - 32 in Section C of the questionnaire (refer to Appendix
A) was to determine whether the municipality has audit committee and does the
audit committee review the PMS.
• Results obtained
The average or mean (x) and the standard deviation (s) (variation around the mean)
of each of the 2 items representing Audit Committee are specified in Table 3.24.
Some of the returned questionnaires have missing or incomplete answers and there
was one questionnaire where the respondent did not respond regarding the Audit
Committee.
Table 3-24: Audit Committee
Audit Committee n mean s
Does your municipality have audit committee? 114 4.140 0.829
Does your audit committee review the PMS
quarterly?
114 3.140 1.510
Analysis of the results
A high mean of x = 4.140 was calculated for the statement that the municipality has
an audit committee. The respondents rated the statement that the audit committee
review the PMS quarterly with a mean of x = 3.140. These suggest that respondents
nor disagree or agree with the statement.
103
3.7 RELIABILITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURING THE CONSTRUCTS
In order to determine the internal consistency between the constructs of the
questionnaire, Cronbach alpha coefficients were calculated (Schimtt, 1996: 350).
The Cronbach alpha coefficient is based on the average correlation of variables
within a test. The greater the Cronbach alpha coefficient, the more reliable is the
scale. A Cronbach alpha coefficient greater than 0.70 could be interpreted as reliable
and internally consistent (Schimtt, 1996:351; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994: 265;
Cortina, 1993: 99).
Inspection of Table 3.11 shows that the alpha coefficient were higher than the
guideline of the alpha coefficient larger than 0.70 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994: 265)
indicating that the measuring instrument used to evaluate the integration of
Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and Performance Management System (PMS)
processes has acceptable reliabilities except alpha of community involvement (alpha
= 0.33). The results indicate that the measuring instrument used in this study to
measure the constructs has acceptable reliability.
3.8 CORRELATION BETWEEN VARIABLES
The relationships between the demographical variable position (Senior Management,
Middle Management and other employees) and the IDP and the PMS were
examined by independent t-tests and effect sizes. For the purpose of this analysis,
any statistical significant differences regarding the p-values (p ≤ 0.05) will only be
mentioned, but any significant differences regarding the d-values will be discussed in
more detail.
These effect sizes (d) will be interpreted, according to Cohen‟s guidelines, as
follows: small effect (d = 0.2), medium effect (d = 0.5) and large effect (d = 0.8).
Results with medium effects can be regarded as visible effects and with d ≥ 0.8 as
practically significant, since it is the result of a difference having a large effect (Field,
2005:32; Ellis & Steyn, 2003:51-53; Thompson, 2001:80-93; Cohen, 1992:155-159).
104
Table 3-25: Descriptive statistics and correlations between variables: IDP
Senior
Management
with
Middle
Management
with
Senior Management 17 4.1961 .68271
Middle Management 32 3.5052 .88342 0.78
Other Employees 63 3.2143 .79053 1.24 0.33
Senior Management 17 4.2118 .44424
Middle Management 32 4.0563 .62058 0.25
Other Employees 63 3.6881 .80285 0.65 0.46
Senior Management 17 4.0784 .57469
Middle Management 32 3.7240 .83238 0.43
Other Employees 63 3.5132 .71486 0.79 0.25
Senior Management 17 3.4412 1.28552
Middle Management 32 2.6094 .98974 0.65
Other Employees 63 2.7540 1.10305 0.53 0.13
Senior Management 17 3.7689 .70010
Middle Management 32 3.4552 .59106 0.45
Other Employees 63 3.3678 .92397 0.43 0.09
Senior Management 17 4.0294 .71743
Middle Management 32 3.6094 .95659 0.44
Other Employees 63 3.0159 1.10340 0.92 0.54
Senior Management 17 3.5294 1.23073
Middle Management 32 3.0938 1.35264 0.32
Other Employees 63 2.6984 1.13073 0.68 0.29
Senior Management 17 3.7647 1.25147
Middle Management 32 3.0938 1.32858 0.51
Other Employees 63 2.7937 1.17992 0.78 0.23
Senior Management 17 4.4510 .45554
Middle Management 32 4.1250 .86240 0.38
Other Employees 63 3.9683 .87726 0.55 0.18
Senior Management 17 4.0915 .65409
Middle Management 32 3.8889 .77444 0.26
Other Employees 63 3.5062 .87073 0.67 0.44
Senior Management 17 2.3971 .75031
Middle Management 32 2.4141 .87899 0.02
Other Employees 63 2.2024 .87512 0.22 0.24
Senior Management 17 4.2409 .59273
Middle Management 32 3.9598 .76047 0.37
Other Employees 63 3.4490 1.05505 0.75 0.48
Senior Management 16 4.1250 .71880
Middle Management 32 3.6250 1.18458 0.42
Other Employees 57 3.4035 1.16281 0.62 0.19
Senior Management 17 3.9510 .89125
Middle Management 32 4.4271 .59257 0.53
Other Employees 63 4.2778 .68979 0.37 0.22
-
0.86
0.00
IDP Process Plan
0.00
Vision
alpha
0.85
0.88
0.16
Projects
0.04
Community
Involvment
0.02
Role Players of
IDP 0.84
0.33
0.91
0.02
IDP Promotion
0.03
Corrective
measures
0.00
Ward
Committees 0.83
-
-
Effect Size
p valuesIDP nIDP n meanStd.
Deviation
Financial
Capacity
0.01
Budget
0.10
IDP Alignment
0.88
0.90
0.77
0.94 0.00
Steering
Committee
Contributing
Factors
0.01
Capacity/
Manpower
0.46
0.08
105
The results from Table 3.25 indicated a statistical significant difference (p < 0.05) in
the mean values between the Senior Management, Middle Management and Other
employees with regard to the IDP: Vision (p = 0.00), IDP process plan (p = 0.00),
Role players of IDP (p = 0.02), Community involvement (p = 0.04), Ward
Committees (p = 0.00), Corrective measures (p = 0.03), IDP promotion (p =
0.02), Budget (p = 0.01) Steering Committee (p = 0.02) and Capacity (p = 0.01).
The correlation matrix from Table 3.25 indicated that with regard to the Vision of the
municipality Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.78) related to
the Middle Management (with medium effect), Middle Management positively related
(d = 0.33) to Other Employees (with small effect) and Senior Management was
statistically significantly (d = 1.24) positively related to Other Employees (with large
effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the IDP process plan of the
municipality Senior Management was positively (d = 0.25) related to the Middle
Management (with small effect), Middle Management positively related (d = 0.46) to
Other Employees (with small effect) and Senior Management was statistically
significantly (d = 0.65) positively related to Other Employees (with medium effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Role players of IDP within
the municipality Senior Management was statistically positively (d = 0.43) related to
the Middle Management (with small effect), Middle Management positively related (d
= 0.25) to Other Employees (with small effect) and Senior Management was
statistically significantly (d = 0.79) positively related to Other Employees (with
medium effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Community involvement
Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.65) related to the Middle
Management (with medium effect), Middle Management positively related (d = 0.13)
to Other Employees (with small effect) and Senior Management was statistically
significantly (d = 0.53) positively related to Other Employees (with medium effect).
106
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Projects Senior Management
was statistically significantly positively (d = 0.45) related to the Middle Management
(with small effect), Middle Management positively related (d = 0.09) to Other
Employees (with small effect) and Senior Management was (d = 0.43) positively
related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Ward Committees the
municipality Senior Management was positively (d = 0.44) related to the Middle
Management (with small effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly
positively related (d = 0.92) to Other Employees (with large effect) and Middle
Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.54) positively related to Other
Employees (with medium effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Corrective measures that
the municipality must take Senior Management was positively (d = 0.32) related to
the Middle Management (with small effect), Senior Management was statistically
significantly positively related (d = 0.68) to Other Employees (with medium effect)
and Middle Management was (d = 0.29) positively related to Other Employees (with
small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the IDP promotion Senior
Management was positively (d = 0.51) related to the Middle Management (with
medium effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly positively related
(d = 0.78) to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management was (d
= 0.29) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the IDP alignment Senior
Management was positively (d = 0.38) related to the Middle Management (with small
effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly positively related (d = 0.55)
to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.18)
positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
107
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Budget of the municipality
Senior Management was positively (d = 0.26) related to the Middle Management
(with small effect), Middle Management was statistically significantly positively
related (d = 0.67) to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Senior Management
was (d = 0.44) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Financial Capacity of the
municipality Senior Management was positively (d = 0.02) related to the Middle
Management (with small effect), Senior Management was positively related (d =
0.22) to Other Employees (with small effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.24)
positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Steering Committee within
the municipality Senior Management was positively (d = 0.37) related to the Middle
Management (with small effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly
positively related (d = 0.75) to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle
Management was (d = 0.48) positively related to Other Employees (with small
effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Capacity to implement IDP
Senior Management was positively (d = 0.42) related to the Middle Management
(with small effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly positively
related (d = 0.62) to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management
was (d = 0.19) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Factors Contributing to the
unsuccessful implementation of IDP Senior Management was positively (d = 0.53)
related to the Middle Management (with medium effect), Senior Management was
statistically significantly positively related (d = 0.37) to Other Employees (with small
effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.22) positively related to Other Employees
(with small effect).
108
Table 3-26: Descriptive statistics and correlations between variables: PMS
Senior
Management
with
Middle
Management
with
Senior Management 17 4.2255 .69707
Middle Management 32 3.5469 .71871 0.94
Other Employee 62 3.3844 .73278 1.15 0.22
Senior Management 17 4.3529 .50046
Middle Management 32 4.1484 .49943 0.41
Other Employee 62 4.0121 .65039 0.52 0.21
Senior Management 17 3.6863 1.09589
Middle Management 32 3.4427 .82698 0.22
Other Employee 62 3.2742 .85256 0.38 0.20
Senior Management 17 3.9412 .40739
Middle Management 32 3.6830 .65690 0.39
Other Employee 62 3.4931 .71437 0.63 0.27
Senior Management 17 3.6863 1.03729
Middle Management 32 2.7292 1.06235 0.90
Other Employee 62 2.6828 1.03917 0.97 0.04
Senior Management 17 3.6863 .80338
Middle Management 32 3.1146 .98231 0.58
Other Employee 62 3.1075 .98212 0.59 0.01
Senior Management 17 3.8487 .77009
Middle Management 32 3.7857 .88287 0.07
Other Employee 62 3.7143 .85558 0.16 0.08
Senior Management 17 4.0588 .74755
Middle Management 32 3.5313 1.10671 0.48
Other Employee 62 3.6935 1.08021 0.34 0.15
Senior Management 17 4.4118 .81997
Middle Management 32 4.3250 .62165 0.11
Other Employee 62 4.2758 .60339 0.17 0.08
Senior Management 17 3.3529 1.61791
Middle Management 32 2.4688 1.36746 0.55
Other Employee 62 2.4355 1.43288 0.57 0.02
Senior Management 17 4.2647 .81236
Middle Management 32 3.5313 .91526 0.80
Other Employee 62 3.2903 1.04233 0.93 0.23
Senior Management 17 4.2941 .88492
Middle Management 32 3.5156 .95448 0.82
Other Employee 62 3.4839 .95371 0.85 0.03
- 0.06
0.63 0.00
0.52 0.01
0.74
0.92
Service Delivery
and Budget
Implementation
Plan
-
Key Performance
Indicators
0.83
Effect Size
p values
0.00
0.10
0.83
0.83
Performance Management System nPerformance Management System n
Early Detection
Internal Audit
Performance
Management
System
Project Team
Development of
PMS
Employees
Communication
Audit Committee
Performance
Management
System
Audit Committee
Quarterly
Meetings
Reasons not
achieving IDP 0.74
0.22
0.04
0.00
0.08
0.82
meanStd.
Deviation
0.13
0.00
0.10
0.13
0.77
0.85
0.76
alpha
The results from Table 3.26 indicated a statistical significant difference (p < 0.05) in
the mean values between the Senior Management, Middle Management and Other
employees with regard to the PMS: PMS (p = 0.00), Development of PMS (p =
109
0.00), Employees (p = 0.00), Internal Audit (p = 0.00) and Audit Committee (p =
0.01).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the PMS of the municipality
Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.94) related to the Middle
Management (with large effect), Senior Management statistically significantly
positively related (d = 1.15) to Other Employees (with large effect) and Middle
Management was (d = 0.22) positively related to Other Employees (with small
effect).
The correlation matrix from Table 3.26 indicated that with regard to the
Communication of the PMS Senior Management was (d = 0.41) positively related to
the Middle Management (with small effect), Senior Management statistically
significantly positively related (d = 0.52) to Other Employees (with medium effect)
and Middle Management was (d = 0.21) positively related to Other Employees (with
small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Project Team for the
development of PMS Senior Management was (d = 0.22) positively related to the
Middle Management (with small effect), Senior Management was (d = 0.38)
positively related to Other Employees (with small effect) and Middle Management
was (d = 0.20) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Development of PMS Senior
Management was (d = 0.39) positively related to the Middle Management (with small
effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.63) positively related
to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.27)
positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Development of PMS Senior
Management was (d = 0.39) positively related to the Middle Management (with small
effect), Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.63) positively related
110
to Other Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.27)
positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Employees and their
performance agreement Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.90)
positively related to the Middle Management (with large effect), Senior Management
was statistically significantly (d = 0.97) positively related to Other Employees (with
large effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.04) positively related to Other
Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the development of Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs) Senior Management was statistically significantly (d
= 0.58) positively related to the Middle Management (with medium effect), Senior
Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.59) positively related to Other
Employees (with medium effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.01) positively
correlated to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Service Delivery and
Budget Implementation Plan (SDBIP) Senior Management was (d = 0.07)
positively related to the Middle Management (with small effect), Senior Management
was (d = 0.16) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect) and Middle
Management was (d = 0.08) positively related to Other Employees (with small
effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Quarterly Performance
Meeting Senior Management was (d = 0.48) positively related to the Middle
Management (with small effect), Senior Management was (d = 0.34) positively
related to Other Employees (with small effect) and Middle Management was (d =
0.15) positively related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to the Reasons for not achieving
IDP Senior Management was (d = 0.11) positively related to the Middle Management
(with small effect), Senior Management was (d = 0.17) positively related to Other
111
Employees (with small effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.08) positively
related to Other Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Early Detection of under-
performance Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.55) positively
related to the Middle Management (with medium effect), Senior Management was
statistically significantly (d = 0.57) positively related to Other Employees (with
medium effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.02) positively related to Other
Employees (with small effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Internal Audit of the municipality
Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.80) positively related to the
Middle Management (with large effect), Senior Management was statistically
significantly (d = 0.93) positively related to Other Employees (with large effect) and
Middle Management was (d = 0.23) positively related to Other Employees (with small
effect).
The correlation matrix indicated that with regard to Audit Committee of the
municipality Senior Management was statistically significantly (d = 0.82) positively
related to the Middle Management (with large effect), Senior Management was
statistically significantly (d = 0.85) positively related to Other Employees (with large
effect) and Middle Management was (d = 0.03) positively related to Other Employees
(with small effect).
3.9 SUMMARY
In this chapter, results of the statistical analysis of data were discussed. Descriptive
statistics such as the position within the municipality, department within the
municipality, highest educational qualification and working experience in a local
government (demographic variables) of the study were discussed. Frequency
distributions of the variables were obtained and generated as tables, graphs and pie
charts. Statistical analysis tools such as the t-test using the group statistics and the
Chi-square were used to analyse relationships between questionnaires, make
112
comparisons of respondents by demographic variables. The next chapter, chapter
four, will summarize this research, its limitations and provide recommendations for
future research.
113
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The aim of this chapter is to formulate a conclusion with regard to objectives of the
research as stated in chapter 1 of this study and to discuss the limitations of the
research. Recommendations will be made with reference to the research
methodology of the study as well as recommendations for further study regarding
municipal IDP and PMS at Local Government.
4.2 BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH
As stated in chapter 2 of this study, the IDP forms the basis for a PMS. The
structures that are developed for the development of the PMS for implementation,
monitoring, review, and evaluation and reporting are integrated with those of the IDP.
In other words, in order for Metropolitan Municipality to monitor and track
performance of all strategically linked projects, there is a need for a common
approach in measuring performance or progress that will be of benefit to the
municipality‟s holistic approach to service delivery and development planning. These
will assist the municipality to improve service delivery, meet targets set out in the key
performance indicators while ensuring that the Metropolitan Municipality achieves its
IDP objectives.
This research sought to answer the following research questions:
To develop a framework that will ensure an effective and efficient integration
of the IDP and performance management system;
Investigate integrated development and financial planning (budgeting)
processes.
Consider the appropriateness of processes and systems linking the IDP with
the budget in the Metropolitan Municipality;
114
Determine whether the performance management system meets the
requirements; and
Develop a framework that will improve service delivery and ensure effective
and efficient implementation of IDP.
Chapter 1 proposes the orientation and problem statement, research objectives,
methodology and procedures as well as provisional chapters of the study.
Chapter 2 provides a foundation for understanding the IDPs and their
implementation in South African municipalities. The chapter explains the evolution of
IDPs and then examines their statutory and regulatory framework. The information
discovered during the development of this chapter established a basis for exploring
the conceptual link between the IDP and the PMS. The attention was focused on
exploring the conceptual and practical interface between the IDP and the PMS. The
chapter illustrated by means of figures the link between the IDP and the PMS the
seamless integration of processes of the IDP and PMS is demonstrated.
Chapter 3 presented the empirical findings on the integration of IDP and PMS
processes in the Metropolitan Municipality. The chapter highlighted the research
design, data gathering techniques and sampling used for the study. Finally, it
concluded by presenting the data which was gathered as well as an analysis of the
findings.
Chapter 4 provides a summary of the research. Specific findings and conclusions
derived from the research are discussed in more detail. Recommendations on the
integration of IDP and PMS process in a Metropolitan Municipality. The chapter
concludes with recommendations for further study to be concluded on the PMS and
the IDP at Local Government.
4.3 CONCLUSION ABOUT THE RESEARCH
With reference to the methodology objective of the research (Chapter 1) the
following discussions are drawn. These research problems were:
115
The primary objective was to develop a framework that will ensure an
effective and efficient integration of the IDP and performance
management system.
The research results identified certain gaps and the need for improvement in the
community development planning process, the monitoring and evaluation of the IDP,
development of PMS, community participation in formation of key performance
indicators (KPIs) and the formulation of the IDP. The results indicated that
respondents were uncertain about the integration of IDP and PMS within the
Metropolitan Municipality.
The first and second secondary objective of the study is to investigate
the integration Integrated Development Plan and financial planning
(budgeting) processes and the appropriateness of processes and
systems of linking IDP and budget.
The research results indicates that the participants nor disagree or agree (uncertain)
with the statement. The respondents are in agreement with the statement that IDP
management and budgeting translate into improved service delivery. They are also
in agreement that council should oversee the preparation of budget of the
municipality. Respondents were in agreement with the statement that budget as
policy process must be driven politically. The respondents were slightly in agreement
with the statements that the annual budget reflects needs listed in the IDP and
linking the municipal budget to the IDP ensures that the needs of community are
addressed.
The third secondary objective is to determine whether the performance
management system meets the requirements.
According to respondents there is working PMS in the municipality. They are also in
agreement that PMS can be defined as a process which measures the
implementation of IDP and PMS is used to assess the implementation of IDP goals.
Respondents indicated that they are uncertain that employees are sufficiently
116
informed about PMS and they are satisfied with the implementation of PMS. The
results also indicate that respondents are uncertain that community is involved in the
development of PMS. Respondents are in agreement with the statement that
reasons for not achieving IDP goals are as follows:
Lack of skills;
No consequences attached to non performance;
System do not support performance;
Lack of resources; and
No motivation to perform because the work environment is not favourable for
performance.
Key performance indicators need to be specified to measure performance of the
employees. According to the results respondents are uncertain that employees are
involved in setting goals in their department and are also uncertain that employees
are aware that the performance goals should be linked to the IDP goals.
One of the requirements with regard to PMS is that internal audit unit must audit the
accuracy of the performance reports and according to the results respondents are
uncertain about the statement.
The following recommendations are made, based on the findings of the empirical
study, in order to improve the integration of IDP and PMS process in Metropolitan
Municipality.
The municipality must review its vision and mission statement to make it
simpler for the community and the officials of the municipality;
There must be a feedback mechanism between employees and the
community;
Performance management must be used as a means for remedial actions to
implement corrective action;
Other employees must be involved in the strategic planning of the
municipality;
SDBIP targets must be realistic and be based on the IDP of the municipality;
117
The council must fulfil its oversight role in making sure that the accounting
officer complies in terms of reporting to council on issues such as an Annual
Report and Section 46 reports based on departmental performance;
Needs analysis needs to take place in the municipality;
PMS must be promoted in the municipality through workshops, departmental
meetings and community meetings;
Ward committees must be capacitated to be involved in the development and
implementation of IDP and PMS;
The municipality must adhere to reporting quarterly in terms of the legislation
and not yearly as remedial actions need to be taken;
There should be a closer working relationship in terms of intergovernmental
relations between the three spheres of government (national, provincial and
local) as well as an interactive and cooperative public-and-private-partnership
in order to eradicate or improve service delivery.
4.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH
The main limitation of this research is that it is confined to Metropolitan Municipality.
The findings of the research will only be relevant to Metropolitan Municipality hence
the findings may not be extended to other municipalities. Therefore, generalising the
results reported in this research to other situation such as a District Municipality and
a Local Municipality should only be done carefully. While there may be common
trends associated with the IDP and performance management, it is important to
appreciate the unique dynamics of each municipality in the country.
There were limitations on the availability of literature on the IDP. The researcher
used useful literature on the IDP and PMS as posted on the website and government
publication. A key assumption of this research is that the employees of the
municipality will be willing to provide true information of the municipality about the
IDP and PMS through a survey instrument.
118
4.4 RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
Recommendations for future research might take place as follows:
Future research can be undertaken to investigate how the IDP at the District
municipality level impacts on the IDP at local municipality level. The IDP of the
district municipality must be informed by the integrated development plans of
its Local municipalities.
Further study can be undertaken to investigate that integration of IDP and
PMS process can be used for effective and speedy service delivery to local
communities.
4.5 CONCLUSION
The IDP is a complex yet well-structured planning and implementation tool for local
government to fulfil its objective. This study has identified the need for further
research that will expand upon the existing body of knowledge on how the IDP at the
district municipality level impacts on the IDP at local municipality level and to
investigate the integration of IDP and PMS process can be used for effective and
speedy service delivery to local communities.
The study has revealed and concluded that the IDP is a tool and a system for
performance management planning; it also acknowledges that there are areas for
improvement in particular the participatory process. To improve the lives of South
African, the first requirement implies community involvement in planning and
management of local development. Drawing from the research conducted on this
study, it is quite evident that the developmental processes require an in depth
participatory planning approaches from all stakeholders involved and affected if a
significant impact on the lives of the poor is to be made.
In this Chapter, the methodology study as set out in Chapter 1 (1.2) has been
completed. The conclusions have been formulated and the limitations of the
research discussed. The chapter concludes with recommendations with references
119
to the methodology study and recommendations for further study to be concluded on
the PMS and the IDP at Local Government. Reference to the planning of the
research as discussed in the research methodology in Chapter 1 (1.4) has been
completed. The specific study objectives as discussed in Chapter 1 (1.3) have been
completed.
120
REFERENCES
AMATHOLE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY. 2012. Performance Management
Framework. East London: Amathole.
BLANCHE, M.T., DURRHEIM, K. & PAINTER, D. (2006). Research in practice. 2nd
Edition. Cape Town: University of Cape Town.
BRYNARD, P.A. & HANEKOM, S.X. 2006. Introduction to Research in Management
- related fields. 2nd edition. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
BUTLER, A. 2009. Performance Management - a different view.
http://www.jedox.com/download/butler-report/butler_epm_report_2009_jedox.pdf
Date of access: 10 May 2012.
CARTER, J. 2012. Integrating planning and budgeting at the local level. Pretoria:
IDASA.
CORTINA, J.M. 1993. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and
applications. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1):98-104.
DE VISSER, JAAP. 2007. „Service Delivery and Budget Implementation Plan:
Common Sense rather than mere Compliance‟. Local Government Bulletin 9(2): 10-
11.
DU TOIT & KNIPE, A., VAN NIEKERK, D., VAN DER WALDT, G. & DOYLE, M.
2002. Service Excellence in Governance. Sandown: Heinemann.
ETU. 2013. The Education and Training Unit. http://www.etu.org.za Date of
access: 12 Jun. 2013.
121
EHTESHAM, U.M., MASOOD, T.M. & MUHAMMAD, M.S.A. 2011.Relationship
between Organizational Culture and Performance Management Practices: A Case of
University in Pakistan. Pakistan.
ETHEKWINI MUNICIPALITY. 2008. Performance Management System Framework.
Kwazulu Natal: Durban: Ethekwini Municipality.
FIELD, A. 2005. Statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.
FOURIE, M. & OPPERMAN, L. 2007. Municipal Finance and Accounting. Pretoria:
Van Schaik.
GUELI, R., LIEBENBERG, S. & VAN HUYSSTEEN, E. 2007. Integrated
Development Planning in South Africa: Lessons for International Peace building?
African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 7(1):89-112. .
INTEGRATED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MODELLING. 2010. Integrated
Development Planning.
KLEIN, R. 2012.Performance Management within your Municipality. Johannesburg:
IMFO.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET GUIDE. 2005. Part IV: Local Government IDP,
Budget and Expenditure Analysis. Pretoria: IDASA
LEEDY, P.D, & ORMROD, J.E. 2010. Practical Research Planning and Design. 9th
Edition. New York, NY: Pearson.
lDP GUIDE PACK. 2001. Performance Management Guide for Municipalities.
Pretoria: Departement of Provincial and Local Government.
122
NATIONAL TREASURY. 2005. MFMA Circular No 13: Service Delivery and Budget
Implementation Plan. Issued 31 January. www.treasury.gov.za Date of access: 11
March 2013.
NEUMAN, W.L. 2000. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches, 4th edition. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
NUNNALLY, J. & BERNSTEIN, I.H. 1994. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
PARNELL, S., PIETERSE, E., SWILLING, M. & WOOLDRIDGE, D. 2002.
Democratising Local Government – The South African Experiment. Cape Town:
Lansdowne.
PAUW, J.C., WOODS, G., VAN DER LINDE, G.T.A., FOURIE, D & VISSER, C.B.
2009. Managing Public Money – Systems from the South. Johannesburg:
Heinemann .
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA). 2013. Auditor General Report.
www.agsa.co.za Date of access: 10 Sep. 2013.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA). 2005. Department of Provincial and Local
Government. Pretoria: Core municipal processes and service delivery manual.
Pretoria.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA). 2000. Department of Provincial and Local
Government. IDP Guide Pack. Pretoria: Government Printers.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA). 2001. Department of Provincial and Local
Government. IDP Guide Pack. Pretoria: Government Printers.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2003. Local Government: Municipal Finance
Management Act, 2003 (Act 56 of 2003). Pretoria: Government Printer.
123
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2002. Local Government Municipal Structures Act,
1998 (Act 117 of 1998). Pretoria: Government Printer.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2002. Local Government Municipal Systems Act,
2000 (Act 32 of 2000 as amended). Pretoria: Government Printer.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2013. Municipal Integrated Development Planning.
Department of Provincial and Local Government: Pretoria: Government Printers.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA). 2001. Performance Management Guide for
Municipalities. Department of Provincial and Local Government. www.dplg.gov.za
Date of access: 17 March 2013.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1996. Republic of South Africa Constitutional Act,
1996 (Act 108 of 1996). Pretoria: Government Printer.
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1998. White Paper on Local Government. Pretoria:
Government Printers.
SA See REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
SALGA. 2012. South African Local Government Association.
http://www.salga.org.za/pages/About-SALGA/Welcome-to-SALGA Date of access:
16 May 2013.
SALKIND, N.J. 2000. Exploring research. 4th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall
SALKIND, N.J. 2009. Exploring research. 7th Ed. Upper Saddle River , NJ: Prentice
Hall.
124
SEAL, W., GARRISON, R.H. NOREEN, E.W. 2009. Management Accounting. 3rd
Ed. London: McGraw-Hill:.
SETSOTO LOCAL MUNICIPALITY. 2011. Performance Management Framework.
Ficksburg: Setsoto Local Municipality.
SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSCIATION. 2001. IDP: A practical
guide to municipalities: Supplementary to the IDP Guide Pack. Pretoria: Government
Printers.
SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION. 2006. Hand Book for
Municipal Councillors. Johannesburg: Global Print.
SUBBAN, M., PILLAY, P., BHOWAN, K. & RAGA, K. 2007. Towards Effective
Service Delivery via Customer Relationship Management, Alternation. Durban:
University of Kwazulu Natal.
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA. 2006. Integrated Development Planning: Course
Manual for the Executive Leadership Municipal Development Programme (ELMDP)
developed for SALGA. Pretoria: University of Pretoria (School of Public Management
and Administration). http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/localgov/webidp.html Date
accessed 24 March 2013.
VAN DER WALDT, G. 2004. Managing performance in the public sector: concepts,
considerations and challenges. Paarl: Paarl Print.
VAN DER WALDT, G., VENTER, A., VAN DER WALT, C., PHUTHIAGAE, K.,
KHALO, T., VAN NIEKERK, D. & NEALER, E.J. 2007. Municipal Management
Serving the People. Cape Town: Juta.
VAN WYK, B. Research design and methods. Cape Town: University of Western
Cape.
125
VATALA, S.W. 2005. Synergies between an integrated development plan, a service
delivery and budget implementation plan (SDBIP) and other related plan for 2005 –
2006 fiscal year. Journal of Public Administration Conference Proceedings, 225-223
http://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/jpad/jpad_conf_2005_a23.html Date of access:
10 June 2013.
VENNEKENS, A. & GOVENDER, S. 2005. Local Government Budget Guide.
Pretoria: IDASA.
WELMAN, J.C. & KRUGER, S.J. 2001. Research Methodology. 2nd Edition. Cape
Town: Oxford University.
WELMAN, J.C., KRUGER, S.J. & MITCHELL, B. 2005. 3rd Edition. Research
Methodology. Cape Town: Oxford University.
YUSUF, F. 2004. Community Participation in the Municipal Budget Process: Two
South African Case Studies. Buffalo City: Global Learning Network.
ZIKMUND, W.G. 2000. Business research methods. 6th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt
College.
126
APPENDIX A: LETTER FROM LANGUAGE EDITOR
Re: Letter of confirmation of language editing
The MBA dissertation “The integration of Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and
Performance Management System (PMS) processes: Metropolitan Municipality by
E.M. Ntlabezo (23131896) was language, technically and typographically edited.
The sources and referencing technique applied was checked to comply with the
specific Harvard technique as per North-West University prescriptions. The
referencing technique employed in the two articles (chapters 3 and 4) pertain to the
specific journal guidelines. Final corrections as suggested remain the responsibility
of the student.
Antoinette Bisschoff
Officially approved language editor of the NWU since 1998
Member of SA Translators Institute (no. 1001891)
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE
To whom it may concern
Esselen str 71 Potchefstroom
2531
Tel: (018) 293-3046
CK 95.17794\73
December 7, 2013
127
ANNEXURE A
APPENDIX B
The integration of Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and Performance Management
processes (PMS): Metropolitan Municipality
This questionnaire is conducted as part of research for an MBA degree at Potchefstroom Business
School of the North-West University.
Dear Sir/ Madam
I hereby request your assistance in filling the attached questionnaire. I am currently conducting a
survey on the integration of Integrated Development Plan and Performance Management processes.
Please note that your participation is voluntary. The questionnaire should take you 20 to 30 minutes to
complete.
Background
PMS is a critical method to monitor the implementation of plans. The IDP process and the
performance management process should emerge to be integrated. Integrated development planning
fulfils the planning stage of performance management. Performance management fulfils the
implementation management, monitoring and evaluation of the IDP process. Performance
management purports to get better results from the whole organisation, from the individual employees
as well as from teams. Performance monitoring systems serve as strategic tool to enable
municipalities to:
Monitor their own performance in the implementation of IDPs;
Improve efficiency, effectiveness, quality and accountability in service delivery while
maximising the development impact; and
Empower communities and the public to hold municipalities accountable as true and real
agents of service delivery and development.
Thank you in advance for giving your valuable time to assist in completing this questionnaire.
Evodia Ntlabezo
MBA Student
E-mail: [email protected]
Cell number: 072 645 3373
128
SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
POSITION WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY
Senior Management 1
Middle Management 2
Other Employees 3
DEPARTMENT
Strategic Projects and Service Delivery Regulation (including Council and Office of the City Manager)
1
Finance 2
Engineering Service 3
Corporate Service (including Planning and Economic Development) 4
Social Services (including Human Settlement) 5
HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL LEVEL
Matric 1
National Diploma 2
Bachelors or Honours Degree 3
Masters or Doctoral Degree 4
Other (Specify) 5
WORKING EXPERIENCE IN A LOCAL GOVERNMENT
0 to 5 years 1
6 to 10 years 2
11 years and above 3
129
SECTION B: INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN (IDP)
On the scale of 1 to 5 as indicated below please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the statements listed below
1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Disagree Nor Agree/Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
STATEMENT SCALE
1 Did your municipality develop a vision statement that explains what the
municipality seeks to achieve?
1 2 3 4 5
2 Does the municipality review its vision annually? 1 2 3 4 5
3 Is the vision of the municipality you are associated with aligned with the IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
4 Is the IDP supportive of the vision of the municipality? 1 2 3 4 5
5 Is the vision indicating what can the community expect from the municipality?
1 2 3 4 5
6 Does your municipal vision enable the community to measure the performance of the municipality?
1 2 3 4 5
7 Does the municipality you are employed with develop its Integrated Development Plan (IDP) process plan on time?
1 2 3 4 5
8 Do you think that the purpose of formulating an IDP process plan is to ensure the involvement of the local community?
1 2 3 4 5
9 Do you think the IDP process plan is aligned to the following legislative requirements?
9.1 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1 2 3 4 5
9.2 Municipal Systems Act 1 2 3 4 5
9.3 Municipal Finance Management Act 1 2 3 4 5
10 Who are the significant role players in the development of IDP?
10.1 Municipal council 1 2 3 4 5
10.2 Municipal officials 1 2 3 4 5
10.3 Community members 1 2 3 4 5
10.4 Private sectors 1 2 3 4 5
10.5 National and provincial sector departments 1 2 3 4 5
130
11 Is the local community involved in the review of the municipality‟s performance?
1 2 3 4 5
12 Do you think the IDP is a key tool for a municipality to implement its projects / programmes?
1 2 3 4 5
13 Do you think the IDP ensures that the projects identified reflect the
needs of the community?
1 2 3 4 5
14 Is the ward committees established in your municipality? 1 2 3 4 5
15 Do you think ward committee members contribute significantly towards the development of a rational IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
16 Does your municipal management take corrective action in time to ensure that IDP performance targets are met?
1 2 3 4 5
17 Does your municipality involve the community in all the stages in the formulation of IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
18 Does the IDP promote the notion of Cooperative Governance and
Intergovernmental Relations?
1 2 3 4 5
19 Do you think the IDP should be aligned to the office term of the Council? 1 2 3 4 5
20 Do you think aligning the office term of Council and IDP will improve
service delivery?
1 2 3 4 5
21 Do you think the IDP should be aligned to the office term of the
Municipal Manager?
1 2 3 4 5
22 Does the municipality you are involved with link the IDP with the financial
plan (Budget)?
1 2 3 4 5
23 Do you think IDP goals are closely related to municipal budgeting cycle? 1 2 3 4 5
24 Do you think effective IDP management and budgeting translate into
improved service delivery?
1 2 3 4 5
25 Do you think the council should oversee the preparation of budget? 1 2 3 4 5
26 Does your municipality table its annual budget to council in time? 1 2 3 4 5
27 Do you think the budget as policy process is driven politically? 1 2 3 4 5
28 Do you think the annual budget reflect needs listed in the IDP? 1 2 3 4 5
29 Do you think linking the municipal budget to the IDP ensures that the
needs of community are addressed?
1 2 3 4 5
30 Does your municipal budget reflect issues as prioritised by the
community and agreed to by council?
1 2 3 4 5
31 Do you think your municipality has adequate financial capacity to
implement IDP projects?
1 2 3 4 5
32 Do you think your municipality is requesting financial assistance from the below listed to support implementation of IDP projects?
131
32.1 Private sectors 1 2 3 4 5
32.2 Local businesses 1 2 3 4 5
32.3 Donors 1 2 3 4 5
33 Do you think your municipality has a steering committee for
implementation of IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
34 Is the steering committee supporting the IDP manager to ensure
implementation of IDP processes?
1 2 3 4 5
35 Are the below listed employees form part of the IDP steering committee members?
35.1 Municipal Manager 1 2 3 4 5
35.2 IDP Coordinator 1 2 3 4 5
35.3 PMS Coordinator 1 2 3 4 5
35.4 Heads of each departments 1 2 3 4 5
35.5 Designated representatives from each departments 1 2 3 4 5
36 Do you think the municipality has enough capacity to implement IDP? 1 2 3 4 5
37 The below listed factors contribute to the unsuccessful implementation of IDP.
37.1 Skills constrains 1 2 3 4 5
37.2 Legislative factors 1 2 3 4 5
37.3 Political factors 1 2 3 4 5
37.4 Weaknesses in accountability systems 1 2 3 4 5
37.5 Weak intergovernmental support 1 2 3 4 5
37.6 Financial constraints 1 2 3 4 5
38 According to the IDP in your municipality, which of the below listed are prioritised as needs of the community?
38.1 Water provision 1 2 3 4 5
38.2 Electricity 1 2 3 4 5
38.3 Solid waste removal 1 2 3 4 5
38.4 Sanitation 1 2 3 4 5
38.5 Health services 1 2 3 4 5
38.6 Social Development 1 2 3 4 5
38.7 Library services/ facilities 1 2 3 4 5
38.8 Safety and security 1 2 3 4 5
38.9 Emergency services 1 2 3 4 5
132
38.10 Customer care system 1 2 3 4 5
38.11 Tar and gravel roads 1 2 3 4 5
38.12 Public transport system 1 2 3 4 5
39. Are there any recommendations that you would like to make in order to successfully implement the IDP?
SECTION C: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PMS)
STATEMENT SCALE
1 Is there a working performance management system (PMS) in your
municipality?
1 2 3 4 5
2 Is the PMS used to asses implementation of IDP goals? 1 2 3 4 5
3 Do you have a clear understanding of the current PMS? 1 2 3 4 5
4 As an employee, are you sufficiently informed about how the PMS
measures performance according to IDP goals?
1 2 3 4 5
5 As an employee, are you satisfied with the implementation of the existing
PMS?
1 2 3 4 5
6 Do you think that PMS can be defined as a process which measures the
implementation of the IDP in line with the organisation‟s strategy?
1 2 3 4 5
7 The PMS is communicated effectively to the organisation levels as listed below.
7.1 Executive Management 1 2 3 4 5
7.2 Middle Management 1 2 3 4 5
7.3 Councillor 1 2 3 4 5
7.4 Other Employees 1 2 3 4 5
8 Has your municipality established a project team, for development of
PMS?
1 2 3 4 5
9 Is the project team for the development of PMS the same people involved
in IDP development process?
1 2 3 4 5
133
10 Are the PMS and IDP development plan aligned? 1 2 3 4 5
11 Are the below listed members involved in the development of PMS?
11.1 Community 1 2 3 4 5
11.2 Councillors 1 2 3 4 5
11.3 Executive Committee 1 2 3 4 5
11.4 Executive Management 1 2 3 4 5
11.5 Sectoral Managers 1 2 3 4 5
11.6 Employees 1 2 3 4 5
11.7 Organised Labour 1 2 3 4 5
12 As an employee, is your performance agreement linked to the IDP goals
or objectives?
1 2 3 4 5
13 Are employees involved in setting goals in their workplace/ departments? 1 2 3 4 5
14 Are employees aware that the performance goals should be linked to the
IDP goals?
1 2 3 4 5
15 Has your municipality developed a set of Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) at strategic level?
1 2 3 4 5
16 Is the community involved in the development of KPIs? 1 2 3 4 5
17 Do the KPIs serve as yardstick for measuring performance according to
the IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
18 Does your municipality have Service Delivery and Budget Implementation
plans (SDBIP)?
1 2 3 4 5
19 Is your municipal SDBIP providing the basis to measure performance in
service delivery against targets set in the IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
20 Is your municipal SDBIP providing the basis to measure performance in
implementing the budget according to IDP?
1 2 3 4 5
21 Does the content of SDBIP flow from the contents of the IDP? 1 2 3 4 5
22 Does the content of SDBIP flow from the contents of the budget? 1 2 3 4 5
23 Does the SDBIP include service delivery targets according to the IDP? 1 2 3 4 5
24 Does the SDBIP include performance indicators according to the IDP? 1 2 3 4 5
25 Are regular quarterly performance evaluation meetings held in the
municipality?
1 2 3 4 5
26 In your opinion are the below listed reasons for not achieving IDP goals?
26.1 Lack of skills 1 2 3 4 5
26.2 No consequences attached to non performance 1 2 3 4 5
134
26.3 Systems do not support performance 1 2 3 4 5
26.4 Lack of resources 1 2 3 4 5
26.5 No motivation to perform because the work environment is not favorable
for performance
1 2 3 4 5
27 Is the community involved in the process of monitoring performance
according to IDP goals?
1 2 3 4 5
28 Is the reporting processes designed in a manner that enables early
detection of under-performance?
1 2 3 4 5
29 Is the internal audit unit auditing the accuracy of the performance reports? 1 2 3 4 5
30 Does your municipality have an in-house internal audit unit? 1 2 3 4 5
31 Does your municipality have audit committee? 1 2 3 4 5
32 Does your audit committee review the PMS quarterly? 1 2 3 4 5
SECTION D: COMMENTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS
1. What are the challenges that the municipality is experiencing in order to successfully implement the IDP?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION AND VALUABLE INPUTS
